^^ 


^\«^  ^^/t. 


VA 


O    LIBRARIES    q 


GENERAL 
LIBRARY 


THE    INQUISITION 


THOMAS  J.  SHAHAN,  S.T.D. 


Jmtirimatur* 

iflJOHN  M.  FARLEY,  D.D., 

Archbishop  oj  New  York. 


New  York,  June  24,  1907. 


THE  INQUISITION 

A  CRITICAL  AND    HISTORICAL    STUDY 

OF  THE   COERCIVE   POWER 

OF  THE  CHURCH 

BY 

E.   VACANDARD 

TRANSLATED   FROM   THE    SECOND   EDITION   BY 

BERTRAND  L.  CONWAY,  C.S.P. 


LONGMANS,    GREEN,   AND    CO. 

91    AND   93   FIFTH  AVENUE   NEW  YORK 

LONDON,  BOMBAY,  AND  CALCUTTA 

1908 


Copyright,  1907,  by 
Bertrand  L.  Conway 


AU  Rights  Reserved 


First  Edition,  February,  1908 
Reprinted,  May,  1908 


^-d'  ^  7^  ^ 


The  Plimpton  Press  Norwood  Mass.  U.S.A. 


CO 

J 

^^  PREFACE 

There  are  very  few  Catholic  apologists  who  feel  inclined 
to  boast  of  the  annals  of  the  Inquisition.  The  boldest  of 
them  defend  this  institution  against  the  attacks  of  modern 
Hberalism,  as  if  they  distrusted  the  force  of  their  own 
arguments.  Indeed  they  have  hardly  answered  the  first 
objection  of  their  opponents,  when  they  instantly  en- 
deavor to  prove  that  the  Protestant  and  Rationalistic 
critics  of  the  Inquisition  have  themselves  been  guilty 
of  heinous  crimes.  ^  "Why,"  they  ask,  "do  you  denounce 
our  Inquisition,  when  you  are  responsible  for  Inquisitions 
of  your  own?" 

No  good  can  be  accomplished  by  such  a  false  method 
of  reasoning.  It  seems  practically  to  admit  that  the 
cause  of  the  Church  cannot  be  defended.  The  accusation 
of  wrong-doing  made  against  the  enemies  they  are  trying 
to  reduce  to  silence  comes  back  with  equal  force  against 
the  friends  they  are  trying  to  defend. 

It  does  not  follow  that  because  the  Inquisition  of 
Calvin  and  the  French  Revolutionists  merits  the  repro- 
bation of  mankind,  the  Inquisition  of  the  Catholic  Church 
must  needs  escape  all  censure.     On  the  contrary,  the 


VI 


PREFACE 


unfortunate  comparison  made  between  them  naturally 
leads  one  to  think  that  both  deserve  equal  blame.  To 
our  mind  there  is  only  one  way  of  defending  the  attitude 
of  the  Catholic  Church  in  the  Middle  Ages  toward  the 
Inquisition.  We  must  examine  and  judge  this  institu- 
tion objectively,  from  the  standpoint  of  morality,  justice, 
and  religion,  instead  of  comparing  its  excesses  with  the 
blameworthy  actions  of  other  tribunals. 

No  historian  worthy  of  the  name  has  as  yet  undertaken 
to  treat  the  Inquisition  from  this  objective  standpoint. 
In  the  seventeenth  century,  a  scholarly  priest,  Jacques 
Marsollier,  canon  of  Uzes,  published  at  Cologne  (Paris), 
in  1693,  a  Histoire  de  V Inquisition  et  de  son  Origine.  But 
his  work,  as  a  critic  has  pointed  out,  is  "not  so  much  a 
history  of  the  Inquisition,  as  a  thesis  written  with  a  strong 
Galilean  bias,  which  details  with  evident  delight  the 
cruelties  of  the  Holy  Office.''  The  illustrations  are  taken 
from  Philip  Limborch's  Historia  Inquisiiionis} 

Henry  Charles  Lea,  already  known  by  his  other  works 
on  religious  history,  published  in  New  York,  in  1888,  three 
large  volumes  entitled  "A  History  of  the  Inquisition  of 
the  Middle  Ages."  This  work  has  received  as  a  rule  a 
most  flattering  reception  at  the  hands  of  the  European 

1  Paul  Fredericq,  Historio graphic  de  rinquisition,  p.  xiv.  Introduction 
to  the  French  translation  of  Lea's  book  on  the  Inquisition.  This  work  of 
Marsollier  was  republished  and  enlarged  by  another  priest,  the  Abbe  Gouget, 
who  added  a  Discours  sur  guelques  auteurs  qui  ont  traite  du  tribunal  de 
rinquisition. 


PREFACE  vii 

press,  and  has  been  translated  into  French.^  One  can 
say  without  exaggeration  that  it  is  "the  most  extensive, 
the  most  profound,  and  the  most  thorough  history  of 
the    Inquisition   that   we   possess."  ^ 

It  is  far,  however,  from  being  the  last  word  of  historical 
criticism.  And  I  am  not  speaking  here  of  the  changes 
in  detail  that  may  result  from  the  discovery  of  new  docu- 
ments. We  have  plenty  of  material  at  hand  to  enable 
us  to  form  an  accurate  notion  of  the  institution  itself. 
Lea's  judgment,  despite  evident  signs  of  intellectual 
honesty,  is  not  to  be  trusted.  Honest  he  may  be,  but 
impartial  never.  His  pen  too  often  gives  way  to  his 
prejudices  and  his  hatred  of  the  Catholic  Church.  His 
critical  judgment  is  sometimes  gravely  at  fault.^ 

Tanon,  the  president  of  the  Court  of  Cassation,  has 
proved  far  more  impartial  in  his  Histoire  des  Trtbunaux  de 
VInquisition  en  France}  This  is  evidently  the  work  of 
a  scholar,  who  possesses  a  very  wide  and  accurate  grasp 
of  ecclesiastical  legislation.  He  is  deeply  versed  in  the 
secrets  of  both  the  canon  and  the  civil  law.  However, 
we  must  remember  that  his  scope  is  limited.     He  has  of 

1  Histoire  de  V Inquisition  au  moyen  dge,  Salomon  Reinach.  Paris,  Fisch- 
bacher,  1900-1903. 

2  Paul  Fredericq,  loc.  cit.,  p.  xxiv. 

3  The  reader  may  gather  our  estimate  of  this  work  from  the  variotis  criti- 
cisms we  will  pass  upon  it  in  the  course  of  this  study. 

*  Paris,  1893.  Dr.  Camille  Henner  had  already  published  a  similar  work, 
Beitrdge  zur  Organisation  und  Competenz  der  pdpstlichen  Ketzergeschichte, 
Leipzig,  1890. 


viii  PREFACE 

set  purpose  omitted  everything  that  happened  outside 
of  France.  Besides  he  is  more  concerned  with  the  legal 
than  with  the  theological  aspect  of  the  Inquisition. 

On  the  whole,  the  history  of  the  Inquisition  is  still  to 
be  written.  It  is  not  our  purpose  to  attempt  it;  our 
ambition  is  more  modest.  But  we  wish  to  picture  this 
institution  in  its  historical  setting,  to  show  how  it  origi- 
nated, and  especially  to  indicate  its  relation  to  the  Church's 
notion  of  the  coercive  power  prevalent  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  For  as  Lea  himself  says:  "The  Inquisition  was 
not  an  organization  arbitrarily  devised  and  imposed  upon 
the  judicial  system  of  Christendom  by  the  ambition  or 
fanaticism  of  the  Church.  It  was  rather  a  natural  — 
one  may  almost  say  an  inevitable  —  evolution  of  the 
forces  at  work  in  the  thirteenth  century,  and  no  one  can 
rightly  appreciate  the  process  of  its  development  and  the 
results  of  its  activity,  without  a  somewhat  minute  con- 
sideration of  the  factors  controlling  the  minds  and  souls 
of  men  during  the  ages  which  laid  the  foundation  of 
modern  civilization."^ 

We  must  also  go  back  further  than  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury and  ascertain  how  the  coercive  power  which  the 
Church  finally  confided  to  the  Inquisition  developed 
from  the  beginning.  Such  is  the  purpose  of  the  present 
work.  It  is  both  a  critical  and  an  historical  study.  We 
intend  to  record  first  everything  that  relates  to  the  sup- 

1  Preface,  p.  iii. 


PREFACE  ix 

pression  of  heresy,  from  the  origin  of  Christianity  up  to 
the  Renaissance;  then  we  will  see  whether  the  attitude 
of  the  Church  toward  heretics  can  not  only  be  explained, 
but  defended. 

We  undertake  this  study  in  a  spirit  of  absolute  honesty 
and  sincerity.  The  subject  is  undoubtedly  a  most  deli- 
cate one.  But  no  consideration  whatever  should  pre- 
vent our  studying  it  from  every  possible  viewpoint. 
Cardinal  Newman  in  his  Historical  Sketches  speaks  of 
"that  endemic  perennial  fidget  which  possesses  certain 
historians  about  giving  scandal.  Facts  are  omitted  in 
great  histories,  or  glosses  are  put  upon  memorable  acts, 
because  they  are  thought  not  edifying,  whereas  of  all 
scandals  such  omissions,  such  glosses,  are  the  greatest."  ^ 

A  Catholic  apologist  fails  in  his  duty  to-day  if  he  writes 
merely  to  edify  the  faithful.  Granting  that  the  history 
of  the  Inquisition  will  reveal  things  we  never  dreamt 
of,  our  prejudices  must  not  prevent  an  honest  facing  of 
the  facts.  We  ought  to  dread  nothing  more  than  the 
reproach  that  we  are  afraid  of  the  truth.  "We  can  under- 
stand," says  Yves  Le  Querdec,^  "why  our  forefathers  did 
not  wish  to  disturb  men's  minds  by  placing  before  them 
certain  questions.  I  believe  they  were  wrong,  for  all 
questions  that  can  be  presented  will  necessarily  be  pre- 
sented some  day  or  other.  If  they  are  not  presented 
fairly  by  those  who  possess  the  true  solution  or  who 

*  Vol.  ii,  p.  231.  2  Univers,  June  2,  1906. 


X  PREFACE 

honestly  look  for  it,  they  will  be  by  their  enemies.  For 
this  reason  we  think  that  not  only  honesty  but  good 
policy  require  us  to  tell  the  world  all  the  facts.  .  .  . 
Everything  has  been  said,  or  will  be  said  some  day. 
What  the  friends  of  the  Church  will  not  mention 
will  be  spread  broadcast  by  her  enemies.  And  they  will 
make  such  an  outcry  over  their  discovery,  that  their 
words  will  reach  the  most  remote  corners  and  penetrate 
the  deafest  ears.  We  ought  not  to  be  afraid  to-day  of 
the  light  of  truth;  but  fear  rather  the  darkness  of  lies 
and  errors. '* 

In  a  word,  the  best  method  of  apologetics  is  to  tell  the 
whole  truth.  In  our  mind,  apologetics  and  history  are 
two  sisters,  with  the  same  device:  "Ne  quid  falsi  audeat, 
ne  quid  veri  non  audeat  historia."^ 

1  Cicero,  De  Oratore  ii,  15. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Preface   v 

CHAPTER  I 

First  Period  (I-IV  Century)  :  The  Epoch  of  the  Persecutions. 

The  Teaching  of  St.  Paul  on  the  Suppression  of  Heretics      .  i 

The  Teaching  of  Tertullian     . 2 

The  Teaching  of  Origen 3 

The  Teaching  of  St.  Cyprian 3 

The  Teaching  of  Lactantius 4 

Constantine,  Bishop  in  Externals 5 

The  Teaching  of  St.  Hilary 6 

CHAPTER   II 

Second  Period  (From  Valentinian  I  to  Theodosius  II).  The 
Church  and  the  Criminal  Code  of  the  Christian 
Emperors  Against  Heresy. 

Imperial  Legislation  against  Heresy         8 

The  Attitude  of  St.  Augustine  towards  the  Manicheans    .      .  12 

St.  Augustine  and  Donatism 15 

The  Church  and  the  Priscillianists 22 

The  Early  Fathers  and  the  Death  Penalty 28 

CHAPTER   III 

Third  Period  (a.d.  1100-1250).  The  Revival  of  the  Mani- 
chean  Heresies 

Adoptianism  and  Predestinationism 31 

2d 


xii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

The  Manicheans  in  the  West 33 

Peter  of  Bruys 3^ 

Henry  of  Lausanne 39 

Arnold  of  Brescia 39 

£on  de  rfitoile 4© 

Views  of  this  Epoch  upon  the  Suppression  of  Heresy  ...  41 


CHAPTER  IV 

Fourth  Period  (From  Gratian  to  Innocent  III).  The  Influence 
OF  THE  Canon  Law,  and  the  Revival  of  the  Roman 
Law. 

Executions  of  Heretics .  5^ 

The  Death  Penalty  for  Heretics 54 

Legislation   of   Popes   Alexander   III   and    Lucius   III   and 

Frederic  Barbarossa  against  Heretics 56 

Legislation  of  Innocent  III 5^ 

The  First  Canonists 64 


CHAPTER  V 

%    The  Catharan  or  Albigensian  Heresy:  Its  anti-Catholic 
and  Anti-Social  Character. 

"»  The  Origin  of  the  Catharan  Heresy 69 

Its  Progress         70 

It  Attacks  the  Hierarchy,  Dogmas,  and  Worship  of  the  Catholic 

Church 73 

It  Undermines  the  Authority  of  the  State 77 

The  Hierarchy  of  the  Cathari 80 

The  Convenenza 81 

The  Initiation  into  the  Sect 83 

Their  Customs 88 

Their  Horror  of  Marriage 92 

The  Endura  or  Suicide 97 


CONTENTS  xiii 

PAGE 

CHAPTER  VI 

Fifth  Period  (Gregory  IX  and  Frederic  II).    The  Estab- 
lishment OF  the  Monastic  Inquisition. 

Loms  VIII  and  Louis  IX 105 

Legislation  of  Frederic  II  against  Heretics 107 

Gregory  IX  Abandons  Heretics  to  the  Secular  Arm     .      .      .  in 

The  Establishment  of  the  Inquisition 119 


CHAPTER  VII 

Sixth  Period.    Development  of  the  Inquisition.    (Innocent 

IV  and  the  Use  of  Torture.) 

The  Monastic  and  the  Episcopal  Inquisitions 136 

Experts  to  Aid  the  Inquisitors 138 

Ecclesiastical  Penalties 142 

The  Infliction  of  the  Death  Penalty 144 

The  Introduction  of  Torture 147 


CHAPTER  VIII 

Theologians,  Canonists  and  Casuists. 

Heresy  and  Crimes  Subject  to  the  Inquisition 159 

The  Procedure 166 

The  Use  of  Torture 168 

Theologians  Defend  the  Death  Penalty  for  Heresy       .      .      .  171 

Canonists  Defend  the  L^se  of  the  Stake 176 

The  Church's  Responsibility  in  Inflicting  the  Death  Penalty  177 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  Inquisition  in  Operation. 

Its  Field  of  Action         182 

The  Excessive  Cruelty  of  Inquisitors 184 


xiv  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

The  Penalty  of  Imprisonment 189 

The  Number  of  Heretics  Handed  Over  to  the  Secular  Arm  .  196 

Confiscation 202 

The  auto  defe 206 

CHAPTER  X 

Criticism  of  the  Theory  and  Practice  of  the  Inquisition. 
Development  of  the  Theory  on  the  Coercive  Power  of  the 

Church 208 

Intolerance  of  the  People 212 

Intolerance  of  Sovereigns 214 

The  Church  and  Intolerance         216 

The  Theologians  and  Intolerance 217 

Appeal  to  the  Old  Testament 218 

England  and  the  Suppression  of  Heresy 220 

The  Calvinists  and  the  Suppression  of  Heresy        .      .      .      .  222 

Cruelty  of  the  Criminal  Code  in  the  Middle  Ages        .      .      .  225 

The  Spirit  of  the  Age  Explains  the  Cruelty  of  the  Inquisition  227 

Defects  in  the  Procedure 228 

Abuses  of  Antecedent  Imprisonment  and  Torture         .      .      .  231 

Heretics  who  were  also  Criminals 233 

Heresy  Punished  as  Such         235 

Should  the  Death  Penalty  be  Inflicted  upon  Heretics?      .      .  238 

The  Responsibility  of  the  Church 242 

Abuses  of  the  Penalties  of  Confiscation  and  Exile        .      .      .  245 

The  Penitential  Character  of  Imprisonment 248 

The  Syllabus  and  the  Coercive  Power  of  the  Church        .      .  249 

APPENDIX   A 

The  Processus  InquisUionis 258 

APPENDIX  B 

Sentences  of  Bernard  Gui 270 

Bibliography 271 

Index 277 


THE     INQUISITION 

CHAPTER    I 

FIRST  PERIOD 

I-IV  Century 

The  Epoch  of  the  Persecutions 

St.  Paul  was  the  first  to  pronounce  a  sentence  of  con- 
demnation upon  heretics.  In  his  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
he  writes:  "Of  whom  is  Hymeneus  and  Alexander,  whom 
I  have  delivered  up  to  Satan,  that  they  may  learn  not  to 
blaspheme.''^  The  apostle  is  evidently  influenced  in  his 
action  by  the  Gospel.  The  one-time  Pharisee  no  longer 
dreams  of  punishing  the  guilty  with  the  severity  of  the 
Mosaic  Law.  The  death  penalty  of  stoning  which  apos- 
tates merited  under  the  old  dispensation  ^  has  been 
changed  into  a  purely  spiritual  penalty,  excommunica- 
tion. 

During  the  first  three  centuries,  as  long  as  the  era  of 
persecution  lasted,   the  early  Christians  never  thought 

1  I  Tim.  i.  20.  Cf.  Tit.  iii.  lo-ii.  "A  man  that  is  a  heretic,  after  the 
first  and  second  admonition,  avoid,  knowing  that  he,  that  is  such  a  one,  is 
subverted  and  sinneth,  being  condemned  by  his  own  judgment." 

2  Deut.  xiii.  6-9;  xvii.  1-6. 

2  « 


2  THE   INQUISITION 

of  using  any  force  save  the  force  of  argument  to  win  back 
their  dissident  brethren.  This  is  the  meaning  of  that 
obscure  passage  in  the  Adversus  Gnosticos  of  Tertullian, 
in  which  he  speaks  of  "driving  heretics  {i.e.  by  argument), 
to  their  duty,  instead  of  trying  to  win  them,  for  obstinacy 
must  be  conquered,  not  coaxed/'  ^  In  this  work  he  is 
trying  to  convince  the  Gnostics  of  their  errors  from 
various  passages  in  the  Old  Testament.  But  he  never 
invokes  the  death  penalty  against  them.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  declares  that  no  practical  Christian  can  be  an 
executioner  or  jailer.  He  even  goes  so  far  as  to  deny 
the  right  of  any  disciple  of  Christ  to  serve  in  the  army, 
at  least  as  an  officer,  "because  the  duty  of  a  military  com- 
mander comprises  the  right  to  sit  in  judgment  upon  a 
man's  life,  to  condemn,  to  put  in  chains,  to  imprison  and 
to  torture."  ^ 

If  a  Christian  has  no  right  to  use  physical  force,  even 
in  the  name  of  the  State,  he  is  all  the  more  bound  not 
to  use  it  against  his  dissenting  brethren  in  the  name  of 
the  Gospel,  which  is  a  law  of  gentleness.  Tertullian  was 
a  Montanist  when  he  wrote  this.     But  although  he  wrote 

1  "Ad  ofi&cium  hcereticos  compelli,  non  illici  dignum  est.  Duritia  vincenda 
est,  non  suadenda."  Adversus  Gnosticos  Scorpiace,  cap.  ii,  Migne,  P.  L., 
vol.  ii,  col.  125.  On  the  different  readings  and  sense  of  this  text,  cf.  Rigault, 
ibid.,  note.     The  Scorpiace  was  written  211  or  212. 

2  "Jam  vero  quae  sunt  potestatis,  neque  judicet  de  capite  alicujus  .  .  . 
neque  damnet,  neque  prasdamnet,  neminem  vinciat,  neminem  recludat,  aut 
torqueat."     De  Idololairia,  cap.  xvii,  P.  L.,  vol.  i,  col.  687.     This  work  was 
written  211  or  212. 


THE   INQUISITION  3 

most  bitterly  against  the  Gnostics  whom  he  detested, 
he  always  protested  against  the  use  of  brute  force  in  the 
matter  of  religion.  "It  is  a  fundamental  human  right/' 
he  says,  "a  privilege  of  nature,  that  every  man  should 
worship  according  to  his  convictions.  It  is  assuredly 
no  part  of  religion  to  compel  religion.  It  must  be  em- 
braced freely  and  not  forced."  ^  These  words  prove 
that  Tertullian  was  a  strong  advocate  of  absolute  tolera- 
tion. 

Origen  likewise  never  granted  Christians  the  right  to 
punish  those  who  denied  the  Gospel.  In  answering 
Celsus,  who  had  brought  forward  certain  texts  of  the  Old 
Testament  that  decreed  the  death  penalty  for  apostasy, 
he  says:  "If  we  must  refer  briefly  to  the  difference  be- 
tween the  law  given  to  the  Jews  of  old  by  Moses,  and  the 
law  laid  down  by  Christ  for  Christians,  we  would  state 
that  it  is  impossible  to  harmonize  the  legislation  of 
Moses,  taken  literally,  with  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles. 
.  .  .  For  Christians  cannot  slay  their  enemies,  or  con- 
demn, as  Moses  commanded,  the  contemners  of  the  law 
to  be  put  to  death  by  burning  or  stoning."^ 

St.  Cyprian  also  repudiates  in  the  name  of  the  Gospel 
the  laws  of  the  Old  Testament  on  this  point.     He  writes 

1  "Tamen  humani  juris  et  naturalis  potestatis  unicuique,  quod  putaverit, 
colere,  nee  alii  obest  aut  prodest  alterius  religio.  Sed  nee  religionis  est  cogere 
religionem,  quae  sponte  suscipi  debeat,  non  vi."  Liber  ad  Scapulam,  cap.  ii, 
P.  L.,  vol.  i,  col.  699;  written  about  212. 

2  Cojttra  Celsum,  lib.  vii,  cap.  xxvi. 


4  THE   INQUISITION 

as  follows:  "God  commanded  that  those  who  did  not 
obey  his  priests  or  hearken  to  his  judges/  appointed  for 
the  time,  should  be  slain.  Then  indeed  they  were  slain 
with  the  sword,  while  the  circumcision  of  the  flesh  was 
yet  in  force;  but  now  that  circumcision  has  begun  to  be 
of  the  spirit  among  God's  faithful  servants,  the  proud 
and  contumacious  are  slain  with  the  sword  of  the  spirit 
by  being  cast  out  of  the  Church."  ^ 

The  Bishop  of  Carthage,  who  was  greatly  troubled  by 
stubborn  schismatics,  and  men  who  violated  every  moral 
principle  of  the  Gospel,  felt  that  the  greatest  punishment 
he  could  inflict  was  excommunication. 

When  Lactantius  wrote  his  Divince  Institutiones  in 
308,  he  was  too  greatly  impressed  by  the  outrages  of  the 
pagan  persecutions  not  to  protest  most  strongly  against 
the  use  of  force  in  matters  of  conscience.  He  writes: 
"There  is  no  justification  for  violence  and  injury,  for 
religion  cannot  be  imposed  by  force.  It  is  a  matter  of 
the  will,  which  must  be  influenced  by  words,  not  by 
blows.  .  .  .  Why  then  do  they  rage,  and  increase  in- 
stead of  lessening  their  folly?  Torture  and  piety  have 
nothing  in  common;  there  is  no  union  possible  between 
truth  and  violence,  justice  and  cruelty.^  .  .  .  For  they 

1  Deut.  xvii.  12. 

2  "Nunc  autem,  quia  circumcisio  spiritalis  esse  apud  fideles  servos  Dei 
ccepit,  spiritali  gladio  superbi  et  contumaces  necaniur,  dum  de  Ecclesia 
ejiciuntur."  Ep,  Ixii,  ad  Pomponium,  n.  4,  P.  L.,  vol.  iii,  col.  371.  Cf. 
De  unitate  EcdesicR,  n.  17  seq.;  ibid.,  col.  513  seq. 

3  Cf.  Pascal,  Lettre  provinciate,  xii. 


THE   INQUISITION  5 

(the  persecutors)  are  aware  that  there  is  nothing  among 
men  more  excellent  than  religion,  and  that  it  ought  to  be 
defended  with  all  one's  might.  But  as  they  are  deceived 
in  the  matter  of  religion  itself,  so  also  are  they  in  the 
manner  of  its  defence.  For  religion  is  to  be  defended, 
not  by  putting  to  death,  but  by  dying;  not  by  cruelty  but 
by  patient  endurance;  not  by  crime  but  by  faith.  .  .  . 
If  you  wish  to  defend  religion  by  bloodshed,  by  tortures 
and  by  crime,  you  no  longer  defend  it,  but  pollute  and 
profane  it.  For  nothing  is  so  much  a  matter  of  free 
will   as   religion."  ^ 

An  era  of  official  toleration  began  a  few  years  later, 
when  Constantine  published  the  Edict  of  Milan  (313), 
which  placed  Christianity  and  Paganism  on  practically 
the  same  footing.  But  the  Emperor  did  not  always 
observe  this  law  of  toleration,  whereby  he  hoped  to  re- 
store the  peace  of  the  Empire.  A  convert  to  Christian 
views  and  policy,  he  thought  it  his  duty  to  interfere  in 
the  doctrinal  and  ecclesiastical  quarrels  of  the  day;  and 
he  claimed  the  title  and  assumed  the  functions  of  a  Bishop 
in  externals.  ''You  are  Bishops,"  he  said  one  day, 
addressing  a  number  of  them,  "whose  jurisdiction  is 
within  the  Church;  I  also  am  a  Bishop,  ordained  by  God 
to  oversee  whatever  is  external  to  the  Church."  ^    This 

i"Nam  si  sanguine,  si  tormentis  religionem  defendere  veils,  jam  non 
defendetur  ilia,  sed  polluetur,  sed  violabitur,"  etc.  Divin.  InstituL,  lib.  v, 
cap.  XX. 

''"Vos  quidem,  inquit,  in  iis  qu£e  intra  Ecclesiam  sunt  episcopi  estis;  ego 


6  THE   INQUISITION 

assumption  of  power  frequently  worked  positive  harm 
to  the  Church,  although  Constantine  always  pretended 
to  further  her  interests. 

When  Arianism  began  to  make  converts  of  the  Chris- 
tian emperors,  they  became  very  bitter  toward  the  Catho- 
lic bishops.     We  are   not   at   all   astonished,   therefore, 
that  one  of  the  victims  of  this  new  persecution,  St.  Hilary, 
of   Poitiers,   expressly   repudiated   and   condemned   this 
re'gime  of  violence.     He  also  proclaimed,  in  the  name  of 
ecclesiastical  tradition,  the  principle  of  religious  tolera- 
tion.    He  deplored  the  fact  that  men  in  his  day  believed 
that  they  could  defend  the  rights  of  God  and  the  Gospel 
of  Jesus   Christ   by   worldly   intrigue.     He   writes:     "I 
ask  you  Bishops  to  tell  me,  whose  favor  did  the  Apostles 
seek  in  preaching  the  Gospel,  and  on  whose  power  did 
they  rely  to  preach  Jesus  Christ?    To-day,  alas!    while 
the  power  of  the  State  enforces  divine  faith,  men  say  that 
Christ  is  powerless.     The  Church  threatens  exile  and  im- 
prisonment; she  in  whom  men  formerly  believed  while 
in  exile  and  prison,  now  wishes  to  make  men  believe  her 
by  force.  .  .  .  She  is  now  exiling  the  very  priests  who 
once  spread  her  gospel.     What  a  striking  contrast  be- 
tween the  Church  of  the  past  and  the  Church  of  to-day."  ^ 

vero  in  lis  qua^  extra  geruntur  episcopus  a  Deo  sum  constitutus."     Eusebius, 
Vita  Constantini,  lib.  iv,  cap.  xxiv. 

1  "Terret  exsiliis  et  carceribus  Ecclesia;  credique  sibi  cogit,  quae  exsiliis 
et  carceribus  est  credita  .  .  .  Fugat  sacerdotes,  quae  fugatis  est  sacerdotibus 
propagata  .  .  .  Hasc    de    comparatione    traditae    nobis    Ecclesiae,    nuncque 


THE   INQUISITION  7 

This  protest  is  the  outcry  of  a  man  who  had  suffered 
from  the  intolerance  of  the  civil  power,  and  who  had 
learned  by  experience  how  even  a  Christian  state  may 
hamper  the  liberty  of  the  Church,  and  hinder  the  true 
progress  of  the  Gospel. 

To  sum  up:  As  late  as  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century 
and  even  later,  all  the  Fathers  and  ecclesiastical  writers 
who  discuss  the  question  of  toleration  are  opposed  to  the 
use  of  force.  To  a  man  they  reject  absolutely  the  death 
penalty  and  enunciate  that  principle  which  was  to  prevail 
in  the  Church  down  the  centuries,  i.e.  Ecclesia  abhorret  a 
sanguine  ^  (the  Church  has  a  horror  of  bloodshed) ;  and 
they  declare  faith  must  be  absolutely  free,  and  conscience 
a  domain  wherein  violence  must  never  enter.^ 

The  stern  laws  of  the  Old  Testament  have  been  abol- 
ished by  the  New. 

depcrditae,  res  ipsa  quae  in  oculis  omnium  est  atque  ore  claraavit."     Liher 
contra  Auxentiuni,  cap.  iv.     Written  in  365. 

1  "Christianus  ne  fiat  propria  voluntate  miles,  nisi  coactus  a  duce.  Habeat 
gladium,  caveat  tamen  ne  criminis  sanguinis  effusi  fiat  reus."  Canons  of 
Hippolytus,  in  the  third  or  fourth  century,  no  74-75;  Duchesne,  Les  origines 
du  culte  Chretien,  2^  ed.,  p.  309.  "Ita  neque  miUtare  justo  licebit,"  says  Lac- 
tantius,  "  neque  accusare  quemquam  crimine  capitali,  quia  nihil  distat  utrumne 
ferro  an  verbo  potius  occidas;  quoniam  occisio  ipsa  prohibetur."  Divin. 
Institute  lib.  vi,  cap.  xx.  Cf.  the  passages  quoted  from  TertuUian,  De 
Idolatria,  and  from  Origen,  Contra  Celsum. 

2  "Non  est  religionis  cogere  religionem  .  .  .  ;  sponte,  non  vi."  Tertullian, 
loc.  cit.  "Non  est  opus  vi  at  injuria,  quia  religio  cogi  non  potest."  Lac- 
tantius,  Divin,  Institut.,  lib.  v,  cap.  xx. 


CHAPTER  II 

SECOND  PERIOD 

From  Valentinian  I  to  Theodosius  II 

The  Church  and  the  Criminal  Code  of  the  Christian 
Emperors  against  Heresy 

CoNSTANTiNE  Considered  himself  a  bishop  in  externals. 
His  Christian  successors  inherited  this  title,  and  acted  in 
accordance  with  it.  One  of  them,  Theodosius  II,  voiced 
their  mind  when  he  said  that  "the  first  duty  of  the  im- 
perial majesty  was  to  protect  the  true  religion,  whose 
worship  was  intimately  connected  with  the  prosperity 
of  human  undertakings.''^ 

This  concept  of  the  State  implied  the  vigorous  pros- 
ecution of  heresy.  We  therefore  see  the  Christian  em- 
perors severely  punishing  all  those  who  denied  the 
orthodox  faith,  or  rather  their  own  faith,  which  they  con- 
sidered rightly  or  wrongly  (sometimes  wrongly)  the  faith 
of  the  Church. 

^"Praecipuam  imperatoriae  majestatis  curam  esse  perspicimus  verae 
religionis  indaginem,  cujus  si  cultum  tenere  potuerimus  iter  prosperitatis 
humanis  ape.rimus  inceptis."     Theodosii  II,  Novcllcc,  tit.  iii.  (438). 


THE    INQUISITION  9 

From  the  reign  of  Valentinian  I,  and  especially  from 
the  reign  of  Theodosius  I,  the  laws  against  heretics  con- 
tinued to  increase  with  surprising  regularity.  We  can 
count  as  many  as  sixty-eight  enacted  in  fifty-seven  years.* 
They  punished  every  form  of  heresy,  whether  it  merely 
differed  from  the  orthodox  faith  in  some  minor  detail,^  or 
whether  it  resulted  in  a  social  upheaval.  The  penalties 
differed  in  severity;^  i.e.  exile,  confiscation,  the  inability 
to  transmit  property.^  There  were  different  degrees  of 
exile;  from  Rome,  from  the  cities,  from  the  Empire.^ 
The  legislators  seemed  to  think  that  some  sects  would 
die  out  completely,  if  they  were  limited  solely  to  country 
places.  But  the  severer  penalties,  like  the  death  penalty, 
were  reserved  for  those  heretics  who  were  disturbers  of 
the  public  peace,  v.g.  the  Manicheans  and  the  Donatists. 

1  On  this  legislation,  cf.  Riff  el  Geschichtliche  Darsiellung  der  Verhaltnisses 
zwischen  Kirche  und  Staat,  von  der  Griindung  der  Christenthum  his  auf  Jus- 
tinian I,  Mainz,  1836,  pp.  656-679;  Loening,  Geschichte  des  deutschen 
Kirchenrechts,  Strassburg,  1878,  vol.  i,  pp.  95-102;  Tanon,  Histoire  des  iribu- 
naux  de  Vlnquisition  en  France,  pp.  127-133. 

2  "Haereticorum  vocabulo  continentur  et  latis  adversus  eos  sanctionibus  de- 
bent  succumbere,  qui  vel  levi  argumento  a  judicio  catholicas  religionis  et  tramite 
detect!  fuerint   deviare."     Law  of  Arcadius,  395;  Cod.  Theodos.,  xvi,  v.  28. 

3"Non  omnes  eadem  austeritate  plectendi  sunt."  Law  of  428,  ibid.,  xvi, 
V.  65. 

4  For  instance,  the  laws  of  371,  of  381,  of  384,  of  389,  ibid.,  xvi,  v.  3,  7, 
13,  18,  etc. 

5  The  Manicheans  banished  from  Rome,  ibid.,  67;  banished  ab  ipso  aspectu 
urbium  diversarum,  ibid.,  64;  banished  ex  omni  quidem  orbe  terrarum,  ibid., 
n.  18  (law  of  389). 

^"Encratites  .  .  .  cum  Saccoforis  sive  Hydroparastatis  .  .  .  summo  sup- 
plicio  et  inexpiabili  poena  jubemus  afifligi."  Law  of  382,  ibid.,  9.  These 
were  Manichean  sects. 


,0  THE   INQUISITION 

The  Manicheans,  with  their  dualistic  theories,  and  their 
condemnation  of  marriage  and  its  consequences,  were 
regarded  as  enemies  of  the  State;  a  law  of  428  treated 
them  as  criminals  "who  had  reached  the  highest  degree 
of  rascality."  ^ 

The  Donatists,  who  in  Africa  had  incited  the  mob  of 
Circumcelliones  to  destroy  the  Catholic  churches,  had 
thrown  that  part  of  the  Empire  into  the  utmost  disorder. 
The  State  could  not  regard  with  indifference  such  an 
armed  revolution.  Several  laws  were  passed,  putting 
the  Donatists  on  a  par  with  the  Manicheans,^  and  in  one 
instance  both  were  declared  guilty  of  the  terrible  crime 
of  treason.^  But  the  death  penalty  was  chiefly  confined 
to  certain  sects  of  the  Manicheans.^  This  law  did  not 
affect  private  opinions  (except  in  the  case  of  the  En- 
cratites,  the  Saccophori,  and  the  Hydroparastatae),  but 
only  those  who  openly  practiced  this  heretical  cult.^ 
The  State  did  not  claim  the  right  of  entering  the  secret 
recesses  of  a  man's  conscience.  This  law  is  all  the  more 
worthy  of  remark,  inasmuch  as  Diocletian  had  legislated 
more  severely  against  the  Manicheans  in  his   Edict  of 

1  Ihid.,  65. 

2  Laws  of  407,  ibid.,  40,  41,  43;  law  of  428,  ibid.,  65. 

3  "In  mortem  quoque  inquisitio  tendit,  nam  si  in  criminibus  majestatis 
licet  memoriam  accusare  defuncti,  non  immerito  et  hie  debet  subire 
judicium."  Law  of  407  {ibid.,  40),  which  we  will  see  revived  in  the  Middle 
Ages. 

4  Law  of  382,  ibid.,  9. 

*Laws  of  410  and  415,  ibid.,  51  and  56. 


THE   INQUISITION  ii 

287:  "We  thus  decree,"  he  writes  Julianus/  "against  these 
men,  whose  doctrines  and  whose  magical  arts  you  have 
made  known  to  us:  the  leaders  are  to  be  burned  with  their 
books;  their  followers  are  to  be  put  to  death,  or  sent  to 
the  mines."  In  comparison  with  such  a  decree,  the  legis- 
lation of  the  Christian  Emperors  was  rather  moderate.^ 

It  is  somewhat  difficult  to  ascertain  how  far  these  laws 
were  enforced  by  the  various  Emperors.  Besides  we  are 
only  concerned  with  the  spirit  which  inspired  them. 
The  State  considered  itself  the  protector  of  the  Church, 
and  in  this  capacity  placed  its  sword  at  the  service  of  the 
orthodox  faith.  It  is  our  purpose  to  fmd  out  what  the 
churchman  of  the  day  thought  of  this  attitude  of  the  State. 

The  religious  troubles  caused  chiefly  by  three  heresies, 
Manicheism,  Donatism,  and  Priscillianism,  gave  them 
ample  opportunity  of  expressing  their  opinions. 

The  Manicheans,  driven  from  Rome  and  Milan,  took 
refuge  in  Africa.  It  must  be  admitted  that  many  of 
them  by  their  depravity  merited  the  full  severity  of  the 
law.  The  initiated,  or  the  elect,  as  they  were  called,  gave 
themselves  up  to  unspeakable  crimes.  A  number  of 
them  on  being  arrested  at  Carthage  confessed  immoral 

1  Boeking,  Corpus  Juris  antejustiniani,  vol.  i,  p.  374- 

2  Justinian,  however,  made  the  laws  against  the  Manicheans  more  severe. 
His  code  decreed  the  death  penalty  against  every  Manichean  without  excep- 
tion. Cod.  Just.,  book  i,  tit.  v,  law  ii  (487  or  510),  ibid.,  law  12  (527).  Cf. 
Julien  Ha  vet,  Vlieresie  et  le  bras  seculier  au  moyen  age,  in  his  CEuvres,  Paris, 
1896,  ii,  121,  n.  3. 


12  THE   INQUISITION 

practices  that  would  not  bear  repetition,  and  this  de- 
bauchery was  not  peculiar  to  a  few  wicked  followers, 
but  was  merely  the  carrying  out  of  the  Manichean  ritual, 
which  other  heretics  likewise  admitted.^ 

The  Church  in  Africa  was  not  at  all  severe  in  its  general 
treatment  of  the  sect.  St.  Augustine,  especially,  never 
called  upon  the  civil  power  to  suppress  it.  For  he  could 
not  forget  that  he  himself  had  for  nine  years  (373-382), 
belonged  to  this  sect,  whose  doctrines  and  practices  he 
now  denounced.  He  writes  the  Manicheans:  "Let  those 
who  have  never  known  the  troubles  of  a  mind  in  search 
of  the  truth  proceed  against  you  with  vigor.  It  is  im- 
possible for  me  to  do  so,  for  I  for  years  was  cruelly  tossed 
about  by  your  false  doctrines,  which  I  advocated  and 
defended  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I  ought  to  bear 
with  you  now,  as  men  bore  with  me  when  I  blindly  ac- 
cepted your  doctrines."  2  All  he  did  was  to  hold  public 
conferences  with  their  leaders,  whose  arguments  he  had 
no  difficulty  in  refuting.^ 

The  conversions  obtained  in  this  way  were  rather 
numerous,  even  if  all  were  not  equally  sincere.     All  con- 

J  Augustine,  De  hceresibus,  Hasres,  46. 

2"Illi  in  vos  sasviant  qui  nesciunt  cum  quo  labore  verum  inveniatur  et 
quam  diflBcile  caveantur  errores  .  .  .  Ego  autem,  qui  diu  multumque  jactatus 
.  .  .  omnia  ilia  figmenta  .  .  .  et  temere  credidi  et  instanter  quibus  potui 
persuasi  .  .  ,  ,  Scevire  in  vos  non  possum,"  etc.  Contra  epistolam  Manichcei 
quam  vacant  Fundamenti,  n.  2  et  3. 

3  On  St.  Augustine's  relations  with  the  Manicheans,  consult  the  numerous 
works  which  he  devoted  to  this  sect.  Cf.  Dom  Leclerc,  L'Afrique  Chretienne, 
Paris,  1904,  vol.  ii,  pp.  113 -122. 


THE   INQUISITION  13 

verts  from  the  sect  were  required,  like  their  successors 
the  Cathari  of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  denounce  their  brethren 
by  name,  under  the  threat  of  being  refused  the  pardon 
which  their  formal  retraction  merited.^  This  denuncia- 
tion was  what  we  would  call  to-day  "a  service  for  the 
public  good."  We,  however,  know  of  no  case  in  which 
the  Church  made  use  of  this  information  to  punish  the 
one  who  had  been  denounced. 

•  ••••••• 

Donatism  (from  Donatus,  the  Bishop  of  Casae  Nigrae 
in  Numidia)  for  a  time  caused  more  trouble  to  the  Church 
than  Manicheism.^  It  was  more  of  a  schism  than  a 
heresy.  The  election  to  the  see  of  Carthage  of  the  deacon 
Caecilian,  who  was  accused  of  having  handed  over  the 
Scriptures  to  the  Roman  officials  during  the  persecution 
of  Diocletian,  was  the  occasion  of  the  schism.  Donatus 
and  his  followers  wished  this  nomination  annulled,  while 
their  opponents  defended  its  validity.  Accordingly,  two 
councils  were  held  to  decide  the  question,  one  at  Rome 
(313),  the  other  at  Aries  (314).  Both  decided  against 
the  Donatists;  they  at  once  appealed  to  the  Emperor, 
who  confirmed  the  decrees  of  the  two  councils  (316). 
The  schismatics  in  their  anger  rose  in  rebellion,  and  a 

1  Cases  are  cited  in  the  Admonitio  of  St.  Augustine,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  treatise:  De  actis  cum  Felice  ManicJuBo,  P.  L.,  vol.  xlii,  col.  510;  cf.  Ep. 
ccxxxvi. 

2  Dom  Leclerc,  L'Afrique  Chretienne,  Paris,  1904,  vol.  i,  ch.  iv;  vol.  ii, 
ch.  vi. 


,4  THE   INQUISITION 

number  of  them  known  as  Circumcelliones  went  about 
stirring  the  people  to  revolt.  But  neither  Constantine 
nor  his  successors  were  inclined  to  allow  armed  rebellion 
to  go  unchallenged.  The  Donatists  were  punished  to 
the  full  extent  of  the  law.  They  had  been  the  first,  re- 
marks St.  Augustine,  to  invoke  the  aid  of  the  secular  arm. 
"They  met  with  the  same  fate  as  the  accusers  of  Daniel; 
the  lions  turned  against  them."  ^ 

We  need  not  linger  over  the  details  of  this  conflict, 
in  which  crimes  were  committed  on  both  sides.^  The 
Donatists,  bitterly  prosecuted  by  the  State,  declared  its 
action  cruel  and  unjust.  St.  Optatus  thus  answers  them: 
"Will  you  tell  me  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  defend  the  rights 
of  God  by  the  death  penalty?  ...  If  killing  is  an  evil, 
the  guilty  ones  are  themselves  the  cause  of  it."  ^  "It  is 
impossible,"  you  say,  "for  the  State  to  inflict  the  death 
penalty  in  the  name  of  God."  —  But  was  it  not  in  God's 
name,  that  Moses,^  Phinees,^  and  Elias  ^  put  to  death  the 
worshipers  of  the  golden  calf,  and  the  apostates  of  the  Old 
Law? — "These  times  are  altogether  different,"  you  reply; 
"the  New  Law  must  not  be  confounded  with   the  Old. 


1  Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  7. 

2  F.  Martroye,  Une  tentative  de  revolution  sociale  en  Afrique;  Donatistes  et 
Circoncellions  (Revue  des  Quest.  Hist.,  Oct.  1904,  Jan.  1905). 

3  "Quasi  in  vindictam  Dei  null  us  mereatur  occidi  ...  Si  occidi  malum 
est,  mali  sui  ipsi  sunt  causa."     De  schismate  Donatistarum,  lib.  iii,  cap.  vi. 

4  Exod.  xxxii.  28. 
6  Numb.  XXV.  7-9, 
e  3  K.  18-40. 


THE   INQUISITION  15 

Did  not  Christ  forbid  St.  Peter  to  use  the  sword? "^  Yes, 
undoubtedly,  but  Christ  came  to  suffer,  not  to  defend  him- 
self.2   The  lot  of  Christians  is  diflFerent  from  that  of  Christ. 

It  is  in  virtue,  therefore, of  the  Old  Law  that  St.  Optatus 
defends  the  State's  interference  in  religious  questions,  and 
its  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon  heretics.  This  is 
evidently  a  diflFerent  teaching  from  the  doctrine  of  tolera- 
tion held  by  the  Fathers  of  the  preceding  age.  But  the 
other  bishops  of  Africa  did  not  share  his  views. 

In  his  dealings  with  the  Donatists,  St.  Augustine  was  at 
first  absolutely  tolerant,  as  he  had  been  with  the  Mani- 
cheans.  He  thought  he  could  rely  upon  their  good  faith, 
and  conquer  their  prejudices  by  an  honest  discussion. 
"We  have  no  intention,"  he  writes  to  a  Donatist  bishop, 
"of  forcing  men  to  enter  our  communion  against  their  will. 
I  am  desirous  that  the  State  cease  its  bitter  persecution, 
but  you  in  turn  ought  to  cease  terrorizing  us  by  your  band 
of  Circumcelliones.  .  .  .  Let  us  discuss  our  differences 
from  the  standpoint  of  reason  and  the  sacred  Scriptures."^ 

In  one  of  his  works,  now  lost,  Contra  partem  Donati,  he 
maintains  that  it  is  wrong  for  the  State  to  force  schis- 
matics to  come  back  to  the  Church.*    At  the  most,  he 


1  John  xviii.  ii. 

^De  Schismate  Don.,  cap.  vii. 

3  "  Ut  omnes  intelligant  non  hoc  esse  propositi  mei  ut  inviti  homines  ad 
cujusquam  communionem  cogantur.  Cesset  a  nostris  partibus  terror  tem- 
poralium  potestatum;  cesset  etiam  a  vestris  partibus  terror  congregatorum 
Circumcellionum,"  etc.     Ep.  xxiii,  n.  7. 

4  "Sunt  duo  Ubri  mei  quorum  titulus  est  Contra    partem  Donati.       In 


i6  THE   INQUISITION 

was  ready  to  admit  the  justice  of  the  law  of  Theodosius, 
which  imposed  a  fme  of  ten  gold  pieces  upon  those  schis- 
matics who  had  committed  open  acts  of  violence.  But  no 
man  was  to  be  punished  by  the  State  for  private  heretical 
opinions.^ 

The  imperial  laws  were  carried  out  in  some  cities  of 
North  Africa,  because  many  of  St.  Augustine's  colleagues 
did  not  share  his  views.  Many  Donatists  were  brought 
back  to  the  fold  by  these  vigorous  measures.  St.  Augus- 
tine, seeing  that  in  some  cases  the  use  of  force  proved 
more  beneficial  than  his  policy  of  absolute  toleration, 
changed  his  views,  and  formulated  his  theory  of  moderate 
persecution:  temperata  severitas? 

Heretics  and  schismatics,  he  maintained,  were  to  be 
regarded  as  sheep  who  had  gone  astray.  It  is  the  shep- 
herd's duty  to  run  after  them,  and  bring  them  back  to 
the  fold  by  using,  if  occasion  require  it,  the  whip  and 
the  goad.^  There  is  no  need  of  using  cruel  tortures 
like  the  rack,  the  iron  pincers,  or  sending  them  to  the 
stake;  for  flogging  is  sufficient.       Besides  this  mode  of 

quorum  primo  libro  dixi,  non  mihi  placere  ullius  secularis  potestatis  impetu 
schismaticos  ad  communionem  violenter  arctari."     Retract.,  lib.  ii,  cap.  v. 

We  wonder  how  this  text  escaped  the  Abbe  Martin,  who  in  his  Saint 
Augustin,  Paris,  1901,  p.  373,  maintains  that  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  "always 
denied  the  principle  of  toleration." 

1  "Non  esse  petendum  ab  imperatoribus  ut  ipsam  hasresim  juberent  omnino 
non  esse,  paenam  constituendo  eis  qui  in  ea  esse  voluerint."    Ep.  dxxxv,  n.  25. 

2  Ep.  xciii,  n.  10. 

3"Pertinet  ad  diligentiam  pastoralem  .  .  .  inventas  ad  ovile  dominicum, 
si  resistere  voluerint,  flagellorum  terroribus  vel  etiam  doloribus  revocare." 
Ep.  dxxxv,  n,  23. 


THE   INQUISITION  17 

punishment  is  not  at  all  cruel,  for  it  is  used  by  school- 
masters, parents,  and  even  by  bishops  while  presiding 
as  judges  in  their  tribunals.^ 

In  his  opinion  the  severest  penalty  that  ought  to  be 
inflicted  upon  the  Donatists  is  exile  for  their  bishops 
and  priests,  and  fines  for  their  followers.  He  strongly 
denounced  the  death  penalty  as  contrary  to  Christian 
charity.^ 

Both  the  imperial  officers  and  the  Donatists  themselves 
objected  to  this  theory. 

The  officers  of  the  Emperor  wished  to  apply  the  law  in 
all  its  rigor,  and  to  sentence  the  schismatics  to  death, 
when  they  deemed  it  proper.  St.  Augustine  adjures  them, 
in  the  name  of  ''Christian  and  Catholic  meekness"^  not 
to  go  to  this  extreme,  no  matter  how  great  the  crimes  of  the 
Donatists  had  been.  "You  have  penalties  enough,"  he 
writes,  "exile,  for  instance,  without  torturing  their  bodies 
or  putting  them  to  death/'* 

1  "Non  extendente  eculeo,  non  sulcantibus  ungulis  non  virentibus  flammis, 
sed  virgarum  verberibus  .  .  .  Qui  modus  coercitionis  a  magistris  artium 
liberalium  et  ab  ipsis  parentibus,  saepe  etiam  in  judiciis  solet  ab  episcopis 
adhiberi."  Ep.  cxxxiii,  n.  2.  Augustine  here  recommends  the  tribune 
Marcellinus  to  treat  his  prisoners  with  the  same  kindness. 

2  "Non  tamen  suppUcio  capitali  propter  servandam  etiam  circa  indignos 
mansuetudinem  christianam,  sed  pecuniis  damnis  propositis  et  in  episcopos  vel 
ministros  eorum  exsiHo  constituto."  Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  26.  "Et  magis  mansue- 
tudo  servatur  ut  coercitione  exsihorum  atque  damnorum  admoneantur." 
Ep.  xciii,  n.  10. 

3"Mansuetudo  christiana."  Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  26.  "Propter  catholicam 
mansuetudinem  commendandam."     Ep.  cxxxix,  n.  2. 

''"Sed  hoc  magis  sufiicere  volumus,  ut  vivi  et  nulla  corporis  parte  trun- 
cati,"  etc.     Ep.  cxxxiii,  n.  i. 

3 


i8  THE   INQUISITION 

And  when  the  proconsul  Apringius  quoted  St.  Paul  to 
justify  the  use  of  the  sword,  St.  Augustine  replied:  "The 
apostle  has  well  said,  'for  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in 
vain.'  ^  But  we  must  carefully  distinguish  between 
temporal  and  spiritual  affairs." ^  "Because  it  is  just  to 
inflict  the  death  penalty  for  crimes  against  the  com- 
mon law,  it  does  not  follow  that  it  is  right  to  put 
heretics  and  schismatics  to  death."  "Punish  the  guilty 
ones,  but  do  not  put  them  to  death."  "For,"  he  writes 
another  proconsul,  "if  you  decide  upon  putting  them  to 
death,  you  will  thereby  prevent  our  denouncing  them  be- 
fore your  tribunal.  They  will  then  rise  up  against  us  with 
greater  boldness.  And  if  you  tell  us  that  we  must  either 
denounce  them  or  risk  death  at  their  hands,  we  will  not 
hesitate  a  moment,  but  will  choose  death  ourselves."^ 

Despite  these  impassioned  appeals  for  mercy,  some  Don- 
atists  were  put  to  death.  This  prompted  the  schismatics 
everywhere  to  deny  that  the  State  had  any  right  to  in- 
flict the  death  penalty  or  any  other  penalty  upon  them.^ 

^  Rom.  xiii.  4. 

2"Sed  alia  causa  est  Provinciae,  alia  est  Ecclesiae.  Illius  terribiliter 
gerenda  est  administratio,  hujus  clementer  commendanda  est  mansuetudo." 
Ep.  cxxxiv,  n.  3. 

3"Proinde  si  occidendos  in  his  sceleribus  homines  putaveritis,  deterrebitis 
nos  ne  per  operam  nostram  ad  vestrum  judicium  aliquid  tale  perveniat:  quo 
comperto  illi  in  nostram  perniciem  licentiore  audacia  grassabuntur,  necessi- 
tate nobis  impacta  et  indicta  ut  etiam  occidi  ab  eis  eligamus,  quam  eos 
occidendos  vestris  judiciis  ingeramus."     Ep.  c,  n.  2;  cf.  Ep.  cxxxix,  n.  2. 

^  "Non  ad  Imperatorum  potestatem  haec  coercenda  vel  punienda  pertinere 
ebdere."     Contra  Epistolam  Parmeniani,  lib.  i,  cap.  xvi. 


THE   INQUISITION  19 

St.  Augustine  at  once  undertook  to  defend  the  rights 
of  the  State.  He  declared  that  the  death  penalty,  which 
on  principle  he  disapproved,  might  in  some  instances  be 
lawfully  inflicted.  Did  not  the  crimes  of  some  of  these 
rebellious  schismatics  merit  the  most  extreme  penalty  of 
the  law?  "They  kill  the  souls  of  men,  and  the  State 
merely  tortures  their  bodies;  they  cause  eternal  death, 
and  then  complain  when  the  State  makes  them  suffer 
temporal  death."  ^ 

But  this  is  only  an  argument  ad  hominem.  St.  Augus- 
tine means  to  says  that,  even  if  the  Donatists  were  put 
to  death,  they  had  no  reason  to  complain.  He  does  not 
admit,  in  fact,  that  they  had  been  cruelly  treated.  The 
victims  they  allege  are  false  martyrs  or  suicides.^  He 
denounces  those  Catholics  who,  outside  of  cases  of  self- 
defense,  had  murdered  their  opponents.^ 

The  State  also  has  the  perfect  right  to  impose  the  lesser 
penalties  of  flogging,  fmes,  and  exile.  "  For  he  (the  prince) 
beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain,"  says  the  Apostle.  "For  he 
is  God's  minister;  an  avenger  to  execute  wrath  upon  him 
that  doeth  evil."  *     It  is  not  true  to  claim  that  St.  Paul 

1  "Videte  qualia  faciunt  et  qualia  patiuntur!  Occidunt  animas,  afBiguntur 
in  corpore;  sempiternas  mortes  faciunt  et  temporales  se  perpeti  conqueruntur." 
In  Joann.  Tractat.  xi,  cap.  xv. 

2  Ihid. 

3"Postremo,  etiamsi  aliqui  nostronim  non  Christiana  moderatione  ista 
faciunt,  displicet  nobis."     Ep.  Ixxxvii,  n.  8. 

*  Rom.  xiii,  4;  Augustine,  Contra  litteras  Petilianif  lib.  ii,  cap.  Ixxxiii- 
Ixxxiv;  Contra  Epist.  Parmeniani,  lib.  i,  cap.  xvi. 


20 


THE   INQUISITION 


here  meant  merely  the  spiritual  sword  of  excommunica- 
tion.^ The  context  proves  clearly  that  he  was  speaking 
of  the  material  sword.  Schism  and  heresy  are  crimes 
which,  like  poisoning,  are  punishable  by  the  State.^ 
Princes  must  render  an  account  to  God  for  the  way  they 
govern.  It  is  natural  that  they  should  desire  the  peace 
of  the  Church   their  mother,  who  gave   them  spiritual 

Iife.3 

The  State,  therefore,  has  the  right  to  suppress  heresy, 
because  the  public  tranquillity  is  disturbed  by  religious 
dissensions."*  Her  intervention  also  works  for  the  good 
of  individuals.  For,  on  the  one  hand,  there  are  some  sin- 
cere but  timid  souls  who  are  prevented  by  their  environ- 
ment from  abandoning  their  schism;  they  are  encouraged 
to  return  to  the  fold  by  the  civil  power,  which  frees  them 
from  a  most  humiliating  bondage.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  there  are  many  schismatics  in  good 

i"Gladius,  vindicta  spiritualis  quae  excommunicationem  operatur." 
Contra  Epist.  Parmeniani,  ibid. 

2  Ibid.  St.  Augustine  remarks  that  the  Donatists  themselves  admitted  that 
the  State  punished  poisoners:  "Cur  in  veneficos  vigorem  legum  exerceri  juste 
fateantur?"  His  reasoning  would  prove  more  than  he  intended,  for  poisoners 
were  punishable  by  death. 

3  "  Et  quomodo  redderent  rationem  de  imperio  suo  Deo  ?  .  .  .  quia  pertinet 
hoc  ad  reges  saeculi  christianos,  ut  temporibus  suis  pacatam  velint  matrem 
suam  Ecclesiam,  unde  spiritahter  nati  sunt."  In  Joann.  Tractatus  xi,  cap. 
xiv. 

■'"Nostri  adversus  illicitas  et  privatas  vestrorum  violentias  ...  a  potes- 
tatibus  ordinatis  tuitionem  petunt,  non  qua  vos  persequantur,  sed  qua  se 
defendant."     Ep.  Ixxxii,  n.  8. 

6  Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  13. 


THE   INQUISITION  2i 

faith  who  would  never  attain  the  truth  unless  they  were 
forced  to  enter  into  themselves  and  examine  their  false 
position.  The  civil  power  admonishes  such  souls  to 
abandon  their  errors;  it  does  not  punish  them  for  any 
crime. ^  The  Church's  rebellious  children  are  not  forced 
to  believe,  but  are  induced  by  a  salutary  fear  to  listen  to 
the  true  doctrine.^ 

Conversions  obtained  in  this  way  are  none  the  less 
sincere.  Undoubtedly  absolute  toleration  is  best  in 
theory,  but  in  practice  a  certain  amount  of  coercion  is 
more  helpful  to  souls.  We  must  judge  both  methods  by 
their  fruits. 

In  a  word,  St.  Augustine  was  at  first,  by  tempera- 
ment, an  advocate  of  absolute  toleration,  but  later  on 
experience  led  him  to  prefer  a  mitigated  form  of  co- 
ercion. When  his  opponents  objected  —  using  words 
similar  to  those  of  St.  Hilary  and  the  early  Fathers 
—  that  "the  true  Church  suffered  persecution,  but 
did    not   persecute,"  ^  he  quoted    Sara's  persecution  of 

i"De  vobis  autem  corripiendis  et  coercendis  habita  ratio  est,  quo  potius 
admoneremini  ab  errore  discedere,  quam  pro  scelere  puniremini."  Ep.  xciii, 
n.  lo. 

2  "Timor  paenarum  .  .  .  saltern  intra  claustra  cogitationis  coercet  malam 
cupiditatem."  Contra  litteras  Peiiliani,  lib.  ii,  cap.  Ixxxiii.  "Melius  est 
(quis  dubitaverit  ?)  ad  Deum  colendum  doctrina  homines  duci  quam  psenae 
timore  vel  dolore  compelli  .  .  .  Sed  multis  profuit  prius  timore  vel  dolore 
cogi  ut  postea  possent  doceri."  Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  21.  "Terrori  utili  doctrina 
salutaris  adjungitur."     Ep.  xciii,  n.  4. 

3"Illam  vera  esse  Ecclesiam  quas  persecutionem  patitur,  non  quae  facit." 
Ep.  clxxxv,  n.  10. 


22  THE   INQUISITION 

Agar.^  He  was  wrong  to  quote  the  Old  Testament  as 
his  authority.  But  we  ought  at  least  be  thankful  that  he 
did  not  cite  other  instances  more  incompatible  with  the 
charity  of  the  Gospel.  His  instinctive  Christian  horror 
of  the  death  penalty  kept  him  from  making  this  mistake. 

•  •  •  • 

Priscillianism  brought  out  clearly  the  views  current  in 
the  fourth  century  regarding  the  punishment  due  to 
heresy.  Very  little  was  known  of  Priscillian  until  lately; 
and  despite  the  publication  of  several  of  his  works  in 
1889,  he  still  remains  an  enigmatical  personality .^  His 
erudition  and  critical  spirit  were,  however,  so  remarkable, 
that  an  historian  of  weight  declares  that  henceforth  we 
must  rank  him  with  St.  Jerome.^  But  his  writings  were, 
in  all  probability,  far  from  orthodox.  We  can  easily 
fmd  in  them  traces  of  Gnosticism  and  Manicheism.  He 
was  accused  of  Manicheism  although  he  anathematized 
Manes.  He  was  likewise  accused  of  magic.  He  denied 
the  charge,  and  declared  that  every  magician  deserved 
death,'*  according  to  Exodus:    "Wizards  thou  shalt  not 

1  Ibid.,  n.  II. 

2  On  Priscillian  and  his  work,  cf.  Priscilliani  quod  superest,  ed.  G.  Schepps, 
1889,  in  the  Corpus  scriptorum  latinorum,  published  by  the  Academy  of  Vienna, 
vol.  xviii;  Aime  Puech,  in  the  Journal  des  savants,  Feb.,  April,  and  May, 
1891;  Dom  Leclerc,  UEspagne  Chretienne,  Paris,  1906,  ch.  iii  (the  author 
follows  Puech  step  by  step,  and  often  copies  him  word  for  word);  Friedrich 
Paret,  Priscillianus,  Wiirzburg,  1891;  Kuenstle,  Antipriscilliana,  Frieburg, 
1905. 

3  Puech,  p.  121.     Cf.  Leclerc,  p.  164. 
*  Schepps,  op.  cit.,  p.  24. 


THE   INQUISITION  23 

suffer  to  live."  *  He  little  dreamt  when  he  wrote  these 
words  that  he  was  pronouncing  his  own  death  sentence. 
Although  condemned  by  the  council  of  Saragossa  (380), 
he  nevertheless  became  bishop  of  Abila.  Later  on  he 
went  to  Rome  to  plead  his  cause  before  Pope  Damasus, 
but  was  refused  a  hearing.  He  next  turned  to  St.  Am- 
brose, who  likewise  would  not  hearken  to  his  defense.^ 
In  385  a  council  was  assembled  at  Bordeaux  to  consider 
his  case  anew.  He  at  once  appealed  to  the  Emperor, 
"so  as  not  to  be  judged  by  the  bishops,"  as  Sulpicius 
Severus  tells  us,^  a  fatal   mistake  which   cost  him    his 

life. 

He  was  then  conducted  to  the  Emperor  at  Treves, 
where  he  was  tried  before  a  secular  court,  bishops  Idacius 
and  Ithacius  appearing  as  his  accusers.  St.  Martin,  who 
was  in  Treves  at  the  time,  was  scandalized  that  a  purely 
ecclesiastical  matter  should  be  tried  before  a  secular 
judge.  His  biographer,  Sulpicius  Severus,  tells  us  ^  "that 
he  kept  urging  Ithacius  to  withdraw  his  accusation."  He 
also  entreated  Maximus  not  to  shed  the  blood  of  these 
unfortunates,  for  the  bishops  could   meet  the  difficulty 

1  Exod.  xxii.  18. 

2Schepps,  op.  cit.,  p.  41-  PrisciUian  wrote  an  apology  to  the  Pope  en- 
titled Liber  ad  Damasum,  ibid.,  p.  39-  Cf.  Sulp.  Sev.  Chronicon.  ii,  P.  L., 
vol.  XX,  col.  155-159;  Dialogi,  iii,  11-23,  ihid.,  col.  217-219. 

3  Chronicon,  loc.  cit.  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  PrisciUian  in  his  Uber 
ad  Damasum  declared  that  in  causa  fidei  he  preferred  to  be  judged  by  the 
Bishops  rather  than  by  the  civil  magistrates. 

4  Sulp.  Sev.,  loc.  cit. 


24  THE   INQUISITION 

by  driving  the  heretics  from  the  churches.  He  asserted 
that  to  make  the  State  judge  in  a  matter  of  doctrine  was 
a  cruel,  unheard-of  violation  of  the  divine  law. 

As  long  as  St.  Martin  remained  in  Treves,  the  trial  was 
put  off,  and  before  he  left  the  city  he  made  Maximus  prom- 
ise not  to  shed  the  blood  of  Priscillian  and  his  companions. 
But  soon  after  St.  Martin's  departure,  the  Emperor,  in- 
stigated by  the  relentless  bishops  Rufus  and  Magnus,  for- 
got his  promise  of  mercy,  and  entrusted  the  case  to  the 
prefect  Evodius,  a  cruel  and  hard-hearted  official.  Pris- 
cillian appeared  before  him  twice,  and  was  convicted  of  the 
crime  of  magic.  He  was  made  to  confess  under  torture 
that  he  had  given  himself  up  to  magical  arts,  and  that 
he  had  prayed  naked  before  women  in  midnight  assemblies. 
Evodius  declared  him  guilty,  and  placed  him  under  guard 
until  the  evidence  had  been  presented  to  the  Emperor. 
After  reading  the  records  of  the  trial,  Maximus  declared 
that  Priscillian  and  his  companions  deserved  death. 
Ithacius,  perceiving  how  unpopular  he  would  make  him- 
self with  his  fellow-bishops,  if  he  continued  to  play  the 
part  of  prosecutor  in  a  capital  case,  withdrew.  A  new 
trial  was  therefore  ordered.  This  subterfuge  of  the 
Bishop  did  not  change  matters  at^all,  because  by  this  time 
the  case  had  been  practically  settled.  Patricius,  the 
imperial  treasurer,  presided  at  the  second  trial.  On  his 
findings,  Priscillian  and  some  of  his  followers  were  con- 
demned to  death.    Others  of  the  sect  were  exiled. 


THE    INQUISITION  25 

This  deplorable  trial  is  often  brought  forward  as  an 
argument  against  the  Church.  It  is  important,  therefore, 
for  us  to  ascertain  its  precise  character,  and  to  discover 
who  was  to  blame  for  it. 

The  real  cause  of  Priscillian's  condemnation  was  the 
accusation  of  heresy  made  by  a  Catholic  bishop.  Tech- 
nically, he  was  tried  in  the  secular  courts  for  the  crime  of 
magic,  but  the  State  could  not  condemn  him  to  death 
on  any  other  charge,  once  Ithacius  had  ceased  to  appear 
against  him. 

It  is  right,  therefore,  to  attribute  Priscillian's  death  to 
the  action  of  an  individual  bishop,  but  it  is  altogether 
unjust  to  hold  the  Church  responsible.^ 

In  this  way  contemporary  writers  viewed  the  matter. 
The  Christians  of  the  fourth  century  were  all  but  unani- 
mous, says  an  historian,^  in  denouncing  the  penalty  in- 
flicted in  this  famous  trial.  Sulpicius  Severus,  despite 
his  horror  of  the  Priscillianists,  repeats  over  and  over 
again  that  their  condemnation  was  a  deplorable  example;  ^ 
he  even  stigmatizes  it  as  a  crime.     St.  Ambrose  speaks 

iBernays,  Ueber  die  Chronik  des  Sulp.  Sev.,  Berlin,  1861,  p.  13,  was  the 
first  to  point  out  that  Priscillian  was  condemned  not  for  heresy,  but  for  the 
crime  of  magic.  This  is  the  commonly  received  view  to-day.  Cf.  E.  Loening, 
Geschichie  des  deutschen  Kirchenreehis,  vol.  i,  p.  97,  n.  3.  Aime  Puech  and 
Dom  Leclerc,  loc.  cit. 

2  Puech,  loc.  cit.,  p.  250. 

3  We  have  also  a  letter  of  the  Emperor  Maximus  to  Pope  Siricius  on  the 
trial,  in  which  he  says:  "Hujusmodi  non  modo  facta  turpia,  verum  etiam 
fceda  dictu  proloqui  sine  rubore  non  possumus."  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  xiii, 
col.  592  sq. 


26  THE   INQUISITION 

just  as  strongly.^  We  know  how  vehemently  St.  Martin 
disapproved  of  the  attitude  of  Ithacius  and  the  Emperor 
Maximus;  he  refused  for  a  long  time  to  hold  communion 
with  the  bishops  who  had  in  any  way  taken  part  in  the 
condemnation  of  Priscillian.^  Even  in  Spain,  where  pub- 
lic opinion  was  so  divided,  Ithacius  was  everywhere 
denounced.  At  first  some  defended  him  on  the  plea  of 
the  public  good,  and  on  account  of  the  high  authority  of 
those  who  judged  the  case.  But  after  a  time  he  became 
so  generally  hated  that,  despite  his  excuse  that  he  merely 
followed  the  advice  of  others,  he  was  driven  from  his 
bishopric.^  This  outburst  of  popular  indignation  proves 
conclusively,  that  if  the  Church  did  call  upon  the  aid  of 
the  secular  arm  in  religious  questions,  she  did  not  author- 
ize it  to  use  the  sword  against  heretics."* 

The  blood  of  Priscillian  was  the  seed  of  Priscillianism. 
But  his  disciples  certainly  went  further  than  their  master; 
they  became  thorough-going  Manicheans.  This  explains 
St.  Jerome's^  and  St.  Augustine's^  strong  denunciations 
of  the  Spanish  heresy.     The  gross  errors  of  the  Priscillian- 

*  Cf.  Gams,  Kirchengeschichte  von  Spanien,  vol.  ii,  p.  382. 

2  Sulpicius  Severus,  Dialogi,  iii,  11-13. 

3  Sulp.  Sev.,  Chronicon,  loc.  cit. 

4  In  a  discourse  delivered  at  Rome  in  389,  the  pagan  panegyrist,  Pacatus, 
expresses  his  horror  for  those  episcopal  executioners,  "who  were  present  at 
the  tortures  of  the  accused,  and  feasted  their  eyes  and  ears  with  their 
groans  and  sufferings."  Panegyrist  veteres,  ed.  Baerhens,  Leipzig,  1874, 
p.  217. 

^  De  Viris  illusiribus,  1 21-123. 
^  De  hoeresibus,  cap.  70. 


THE    INQUISITION  27 

ists  in  the  fifth  century  attracted  in  447  the  attention 
of  Pope  St.  Leo.  He  reproaches  them  for  breaking  the 
bonds  of  marriage,  rejecting  all  idea  of  chastity,  and  con- 
travening all  rights,  human  and  divine.  He  evidently 
held  Priscillian  responsible  for  all  these  teachings.  That 
is  why  he  rejoices  in  the  fact  that  "the  secular  princes, 
horrified  at  this  sacrilegious  folly,  executed  the  author 
of  these  errors  with  several  of  his  followers."  He  even 
declares  that  this  action  of  the  State  is  helpful  to  the 
Church.  He  writes:  "The  Church,  in  the  spirit  of  Christ, 
ought  to  denounce  heretics,  but  should  never  put  them 
to  death;  still  the  severe  laws  of  Christian  princes  redound 
to  her  good,  for  some  heretics  through  fear  of  punish- 
ment are  won  back  to  the  true  faith."  ^  St.  Leo  in  this 
passage  is  rather  severe.  While  he  does  not  yet  require 
the  death  penalty  for  heresy,  he  accepts  it  in  the  name 
of  the  public  good.  It  is  greatly  to  be  feared  that  the 
churchmen  of  the  future  will  go  a  great  deal  further. 
The  Church  is  endeavoring  to  state  her  position  accu- 

i"Merito  patres  nostri  sub  quorum  temporibus  haeresis  haec  nefanda 
prorupit,  per  totum  mundum  instanter  egere  ut  impius  furor  ab  universa 
Ecclesia  pelleretur.  Quando  etiam  mundi  principes  ita  hanc  sacrilegam 
amentiam  detestati  sunt,  ut  auctorem  ejus  cum  plerisque  discipulis  legum 
publicarum  ense  prosternerent.  Videbant  enim  omnem  curam  honestatis 
auferri,  omnem  conjugiorum  copulam  solvi,  simulque  divinum  jus  humanum- 
que  subvert!,  si  hujusmodi  hominibus  usquam  vivere  cum  tali  professione 
licuisset.  Profuit  ista  districtio  ecclesiasticas  lenitati,  quae  etsi  sacerdotali 
contenta  judicio,  cruentas  refugit  ultiones,  severis  tamen  christianorum 
principum  constitutionibus  adjuvatur,  dum  ad  spiritale  nonnunquam  recur- 
runt  remedium,  qui  timent  corporale  supplicium."  Ep.  xv,  ad  Turribium, 
P.  L.,  vol.  liv,  col.  679-680. 


28  THE   INQUISITION 

rately  on  the  suppression  of  heresy.  She  declares  that 
nothing  will  justify  her  shedding  of  human  blood.  This 
is  evident  from  the  conduct  and  writings  of  St.  Augustine, 
St.  Martin,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Leo  (cruentas  rejugit  ultiones), 
and  Ithacius  himself.  But  to  what  extent  should  she 
accept  the  aid  of  the  civil  power,  when  it  undertakes  to 
defend  her  teachings  by  force? 

Some  writers,  like  St.  Optatus  of  Mileve,  and  Pris- 
cillian,  later  on  the  victim  of  his  own  teaching,  believed 
that  the  Christian  state  ought  to  use  the  sword  against 
heretics  guilty  of  crimes  against  the  public  welfare;  and 
strangely  enough,  they  quote  the  Old  Testament  as  their 
authority.  Without  giving  his  approval  to  this  theory, 
St.  Leo  the  Great  did  not  condemn  the  practical  applica- 
tion of  it  in  the  case  of  the  Priscillianists.  The  Church, 
according  to  him,  while  assuming  no  responsibility  for 
them,  reaped  the  benefit  of  the  rigorous  measures  taken 
by  the  State.  f 

But  most  of  the  Bishops  absolutely  condemned  the 
infliction  of  the  death  penalty  for  heresy,  even  if  the  heresy 
was  incidentally  the  cause  of  social  disturbances.  Such 
was  the  view  of  St.  Augustine,^  St.  Martin,  St.  Ambrose, 
many  Spanish  bishops,  and  a  bishop  of  Gaul  named 
Theognitus;^  in  a  word,  of  all  who  disapproved  of  the  con- 


*  Corrigi  eos  volumus,  non  necari;  nee  disciplinam  circa  eos  negligi  volumus, 
nee  suppliciis  quibus  digni  sunt  exerceri.       Ep.  c,  n.  i. 
2Cf.  Sulpicius  Severus,  Dialogi,  iii,  12,  loc.  cit.,  col.  218. 


THE   INQUISITION  29 

demnation  of  Priscillian.  As  a  rule,  they  protested  in 
the  name  of  Christian  charity;  they  voiced  the  new  spirit 
of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  At  the  other  extremity  of  the 
Catholic  world,  St.  John  Chrysostom  re-echoes  their 
teaching.  "To  put  a  heretic  to  death,"  he  says,  "is  an 
unpardonable  crime."  ^ 

But  in  view  of  the  advantage  to  the  Church,  either 
from  the  maintenance  of  the  public  peace,  or  from  the 
conversion  of  individuals,  the  State  may  employ  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  force  against  heretics. 

"God  forbids  us  to  put  them  to  death,"  continues  St. 
Chrysostom,  "just  as  he  forbade  the  servants  to  gather 
up  the  cockle,"  ^  because  he  regards  their  conversion  as 
possible;  but  he  does  not  forbid  us  doing  all  in  our  power 
to  prevent  their  public  meetings,  and  their  preaching  of 
false  doctrine.^  St.  Augustine  adds  that  they  may  be 
punished  by  fme  and  exile. 

1  St.  John  Chrysostom  remarks  that  the  Savior  forbade  the  servants  to 
gather  up  the  cockle  in  the  field  of  the  householder,  and   adds: 

TovTo  8^  eXeye,  koK^iojv  7ro\^/ious  ylvecrdai  Kal  aifMara  Kal  (Tcpdyas.  Ov 
•yhp  8ei  avapelv  alpenKov  iirel  7r6Xe/i,os  acrirovBos  els  ttiv  olKov/xivrjv 
ifAcWev  eiadyeaOai.     Homilia  xlvi,  in  Matthcsum,  cap.  i. 

2  Ibid.,  cap.  ii. 

^"Cjeterum  intra  Ecclesiam  potestates  necessariae  non  essent  nisi  ut  quod 
non  prasvalet  sacerdos  efficere  per  doctrinae  sermonem,  potestas  hoc  imperet 
per  discipUnae  terrorem  (cf.  the  diligentia  disciplina  of  St.  Augustine,  Re- 
tractat.,  lib.  ii,  cap.  v).  Sic  per  regnum  terrenum  c^eleste  regnum  proficit, 
ut  qui  intra  Ecclesiam  positi  contra  fidem  et  disciplinam  quam  Ecclesiae 
humilitas  exercere  non  prsevalet,  cervicibus  superborum  potestas  principahs 
imponat  et  ut  venerationem  mereatur  virtute  potestatis  impertiat  .  .  .  Cog- 
noscant  principes  sasculi  Deo  debere  se  rationem  reddere  propter  Ecclesiam 


30  THE   INQUISITION 

To  this  extent  the  churchmen  of  the  day  accepted  the 
aid  of  the  secular  arm.  Nor  were  they  content  with 
merely  accepting  it.  They  declared  that  the  State  had 
not  only  the  right  to  help  the  Church  in  suppressing 
heresy,  but  that  she  was  in  duty  bound  to  do  so.  In  the 
seventh  century,  St.  Isidore  of  Seville  discusses  this  ques- 
tion in  practically  the  same  terms  as  St.  Augustine.^ 

quam  a  Christo  tuendam  suscipiunt  (cf.  Augustine,  In  Joann.  Tractat.  xi, 
cap.  xiv).  Nam  sive  augeatur  pax  et  disciplina  Ecclesiae  per  fideles  principes, 
sive  solvatur,  ille  ab  eis  rationem  exiget,  qui  eorum  potestati  suam  Ecclesiam 
credidit."     Sententiarum,   lib.   iii,    cap.   1,   n.    4-6,   P.  L.,    vol.    Ixxxiii,    col. 

723- 

1  We  think  it  important  to  give  Lea's  resume  of  this  period.  It  will  show 
how  a  writer,  although  trying  to  be  impartial,  may  distort  the  facts:  "It  was 
only  sixty-two  years  after  the  slaughter  of  Priscillian  and  his  followers  had 
excited  so  much  horror,  that  Leo  I,  when  the  heresy  seemed  to  be  reviving, 
in  447,  not  only  justified  the  act,  but  declared  that  i}  the  followers  of  heresy 
so  damnable  were  allowed  to  live,  there  would  be  an  end  to  human  and  divine 
law.  The  final  step  had  been  taken,  and  the  Church  was  definitely  pledged 
to  the  suppression  of  heresy  at  wJmtever  cost.  It  is  impossible  not  to  attribute 
to  ecclesiastical  influence  the  successive  Edicts  by  which,  from  the  time  of 
Theodosius  the  Great,  persistence  in  heresy  was  punished  by  death.  A 
powerful  impulse  to  this  development  is  to  be  found  in  the  responsibility 
which  grew  upon  the  Church  from  its  connection  with  the  State.  When  it 
could  influence  the  monarch  and  procure  from  him  Edicts  condemning  here- 
tics to  exile,  to  the  mines,  and  even  to  death,  it  felt  that  God  had  put  into  its 
hands  powers  to  be  exercised  and  not  to  be  neglected"  (vol.  i,  p.  215).  If 
we  read  carefully  the  words  of  St.  Leo  (p.  27,  note  i),  we  shall  see  that  the 
Emperors  are  responsible  for  the  words  that  Lea  ascribes  to  the  Pope.  It  is 
hard  to  understand  how  he  can  assert  that  the  imperial  Edicts  decreeing  the 
death  penalty  are  due  to  ecclesiastical  influence,  when  we  notice  that  nearly 
all  the  churchmen  of  the  day  protested  against  such  a  penalty. 


CHAPTER    III 

THIRD  PERIOD. 

From  iioo  to  1250 

The   Revival  of  the   Manichean   Heresies   in   the 

Middle  Ages 

From  the  sixth  to  the  eleventh  century,  heretics,  with 
the  exception  of  certain  Manichean  sects,  were  hardly  ever 
persecuted.^  In  the  sixth  century,  for  instance,  the 
Arians  lived  side  by  side  with  the  Catholics,  under  the 
protection  of  the  State,  in  a  great  many  Italian  cities, 
especially  in  Ravenna  and  Pavia.^ 

During  the  Carlovingian  period,  we  come  across  a  few 

heretics,  but  they  gave  little  trouble. 

The  Adoptianism  of  Elipandus,  Archbishop  of  Toledo, 
and  Felix,  Bishop  of  Urgel,  was  abandoned  by  its  authors, 

1  In  556,  Manicheans  were  put  to  death  at  Ravenna,  in  accordance  with 
the  laws  of  Justinian.  Agnelli  liber  poniificalis  ecclesia  Ravennatis,  cap. 
Ixxix,  in  Monum.  Germanics,  Rerum  Langobard.     Scriptores,  p.  331. 

2"Hujus  temporibus  pene  per  omnes  civitates  regni  ejus  (Rotharici)  duo 
episcopi  erant,  unus  catholicus  et  alter  arianus.  In  civitate  Ticinensi  usque 
nunc  ostenditur  ubi  arianus  episcopus  apud  basilican  Sancti  Eusebii  residens 
baptisterium  habuit,  cum  tamen  ecclesiae  catholics  ahus  episcopus  resideret." 
Pauli  diacon.,  Histor.  Langobard.,  Ub.  iv,  cap.  xlii,  Mon.  Germ.,  Rer.  Lango- 
bard.  SS.,  p.  134.  We  may  still  visit  at  Ravenna  the  Arian  and  Catholic 
baptisteries  of  the  sixth  century.  Cf.  Gregorii  Magni  Dialogi,  iii,  cap.  xxix, 
Mon.  Germ.,  ibid.,  pp.  534-535- 

31 


32  THE   INQUISITION 

after  it  had  been  condemned  by  Pope  Adrian  I,  and  several 
provincial  councils.^ 

A  more  important  heresy  arose  in  the  ninth  century. 
Godescalcus,  a  monk  of  Orbais,  in  the  diocese  of  Soissons, 
taught  that  Jesus  Christ  did  not  die  for  all  men.  His 
errors  on  predestination  were  condemned  as  heretical  by 
the  council  of  Mainz  (848)  and  Quierzy  (849);  and  he 
himself  was  sentenced  to  be  flogged  and  then  imprisoned 
for  life  in  the  monastery  of  Hautvilliers.^  But  this 
punishment  of  flogging  was  a  purely  ecclesiastical  penalty. 
Archbishop  Hincmar  in  ordering  it  declared  that  he  was 
acting  in  accordance  with  the  rule  of  St.  Benedict,  and  a 
canon  of  the  Council  of  Agde.^ 

The  imprisonment  to  which  Godescalcus  was  sub- 
jected was  likewise  a  monastic  punishment.  Practically, 
it  did  not  imply  much  more  than  the  confinement  strictly 
required  by  the  rules  of  his  convent.  It  is  interesting  to 
note  that  imprisonment  for  crime  is  of  purely  ecclesias- 

1  Einhard:  Annales,  ann.  792,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  i,  p.  179. 

2  "In  nostra  parochia  .  .  .  monasteriali  custodise  mancipatus  est."  Hinc- 
mar's  letter  to  Pope  Nicholas  I,  Hincmari  Opera,  ed.  Sirmond,  Paris,  1645, 
vol.  ii,  p.  262. 

3"Verberum  vel  corporis  castigatione  .  .  .  coercendus,  says  Hincmar, 
secundum  regulam  sancti  Benedicti."  De  non  trina  deitate,  cap.  xviii,  in 
Hincmari  Opera,  vol.  i,  p.  552.  The  rule  of  St.  Benedict  provided  for  the 
acrior  correctio,  id  est  ut  verberum  vindicta  in  cum  (monachum)  procedat, 
cap.  xxviii;  cf.  Concilium  Agaihense,  ann.  506,  cap.  xxviii:  "In  monachis 
quoque  par  sententiae  forma  servetur:  quos  si  verborum  increpatio  non 
emendaverit,  etiam  verberibus  statuimus  coerceri."  Recall  what  St. 
Augustine  said  of  the  use  of  flogging  in  the  episcopal  tribunals  of  his 
time. 


THE   INQUISITION  33 

tical  origin.  The  Roman  law  knew  nothing  of  it.  It 
was  at  first  a  penalty  peculiar  to  monks  and  clerics,  al- 
though later  on  laymen  also  were  subjected  to  it. 

About  the  year  1000,  the  Manicheans  under  various 
names  came  from  Bulgaria,  and  spread  over  western 
Europe.^  We  meet  them  about  this  time  in  Italy,  Spain, 
France,  and  Germany.  Public  sentiment  soon  became 
bitter  against  them,  and  they  became  the  victims  of  a 
general,  though  intermittent,  persecution.  Orleans,  Arras, 
Cambrai,  Chalons,  Goslai,  Liege,  Soissons,  Ravenna, 
Monteforte,  Asti,  and  Toulouse  became  the  field  of  their 
propaganda,  and  often  the  place  of  their  execution. 
Several  heretics  like  Peter  of  Bruys,  Henry  of  Lausanne, 
Arnold  of  Brescia,  and  £on  de  I'Etoile  (Eudo  de  Stella), 
likewise  troubled  the  Church,  who  to  stop  their  bold  propa- 
ganda used  force  herself,  or  permitted  the  State  or  the 
people  to  use  it. 

It  was  at  Orleans  in  1022  that  Catholics  for  the  first 
time  during  this  period  treated  heretics  with  cruelty. 
An  historian  of  the  time  assures  us  that  this  cruelty  was 
due  to  both  king  and  people:  regis  jussu  et  universce 
plebts  consensu?  King  Robert,  dreading  the  disastrous 
effects  of  heresy  upon  his  kingdom,  and  the  consequent 

1  Cf.  C.  Schmidt,  Histoire  et  doctrine  de  la  secte  des  Cathares,  vol.  i,  pp.  i6- 
54,  82. 

2  Raoul  Glaber,  Hist.,  lib.  iii,  cap.  viii,  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p.  38. 
For  other  authorities  consult  Julien  Havet,  L'heresie  et  le  bras  seculier  au  moyen 
Qge,  in  his  CEuvres,  Paris,  1896,  vol.  ii,  pp.  128-130. 

4 


34  THE   INQUISITION 

loss  of  souls/  sent  thirteen  of  the  principal  clerics 
and  laymen  of  the  town  to  the  stake.^  It  has  been 
pointed  out  that  this  penalty  was  something  unheard- 
of  at  the  time.  "Robert  was  therefore  the  originator 
of  the  punishment  which  he  decreed."  ^  It  might  be 
said,  however,  that  this  penalty  originated  with  the 
people,  and  that  the  king  merely  followed  out  the  pop- 
ular will. 

For,  as  an  old  chronicler  tells  us,  this  execution  at 
Orleans  was  not  an  isolated  fact;  in  other  places  the 
populace  hunted  out  heretics,  and  burned  them  outside 
the  city  walls.'' 

Several  years  later,  the  heretics  who  swarmed  into  the 
diocese  of  Chalons  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Bishop 
of  the  city,  who  was  puzzled  how  to  deal  with  them.  He 
consulted  Wazo,  the  Bishop  of  Liege,  who  tells  us  that 
the  French  were  "infuriated"  against  heretics.^  These 
words  would  seem  to  prove  that  the  heretics  of  the  day 
were   prosecuted   more   vigorously  than   the   documents 

^"Quoniam  et  ruinam  patriae  revera  et  animarum  metuebat  interitum." 
Raoul  Glaber,  loc.  cit. 

2  Ep.  Johannis  monachi  Floriacensis,  in  the  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p. 
498. 

3  Julien  Havet,  op.  cit.,  pp.  128-129. 

It  is  not  probable  that  the  King  was  inspired  by  the  laws  of  the  empire 
against  the  Manicheans. 

^  Cartulaire  de  I'abbaye  de  Saint-Pere  de  Chartres,  ed.  Guerard,  vol.  i, 
p.  108  and  seq.;  cf.  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p.  539. 

^"Prascipitem  Francigenarum  rabiem."  Anselmi,  Gesta  episcop.  Leodien- 
sium,  cap.  Ixiii,  Mon.  GermanicR  SS.,  vol.  vii,  p.  228. 


THE   INQUISITION  35 

we  possess  go  to  show.  It  is  probable  that  the  Bishop  of 
Chalons  detested  the  "fury"  of  the  persecutors.  We 
will  see  later  on  the  answer  that  Wazo  sent  him. 

During  the  Christmas  holidays  of  1051  and  1052,  a 
number  of  Manicheans  or  Cathari,  as  they  were  called, 
were  executed  at  Goslar,  after  they  had  refused  to  re- 
nounce their  errors.  Instead  of  being  burned,  as  in 
France,  "they  were  hanged." 

These  heretics  were  executed  by  the  orders  of  Henry  III, 
and  in  his  presence.  But  the  chronicler  of  the  event 
remarks  that  every  one  applauded  the  Emperor's  action, 
because  he  had  prevented  the  spread  of  the  leprosy  of 
heresy,  and  thus  saved  many  souls.^ 

Twenty-five  years  later,  in  1076  or  1077,  a  Catharan  of 
the  district  of  Cambrai  appeared  before  the  Bishop  of 
Cambrai  and  his  clerics,  and  was  condemned  as  a  heretic. 
The  Bishop's  officers  and  the  crowd  at  once  seized  him, 
led  him  outside  the  city's  gates,  and  while  he  knelt  and 
calmly  prayed,  they  burned  him  at  the  stake.^ 

A  little  while  before  this  the  Archbishop  of  Ravenna 
accused  a  man  named  Vilgard  of  heresy,  but  what  the 

1  "Imperator  .  .  .  quosdam  hsereticos  .  .  .  consensu  cunctorum,  ne  hae- 
retica  scabies  latius  serpens  plures  inficeret,  in  patibulo  suspendi  jussit." 
Heriman,  Aug.  Chronicon,  ann.  1052,  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  v,  p.  130.  Cf. 
Lamberti,  Annales,  1053,  ibid.,  p.  155. 

2  Chronicon  S.  Andreae  Camerac,  iii,  3,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  vii, 
p.  540. 

We  have  a  letter  of  Gregory  VII  in  which  he  denounces  the  irregular 
character  of  this  execution.     Ibid.,  p.  540,  n.  31. 


36  THE   INQUISITION 

result  of  the  trial  was,  we  cannot  discover.  But  we  do 
know  that  during  this  period  other  persons  were  prose- 
cuted for  heresy,  and  that  they  were  beheaded  or  sent  to 
the  stake.^ 

At  Monteforte  near  Asti,  the  Cathari  had,  about  1034, 
an  important  settlement.  The  Marquis  Mainfroi,  his 
brother  the  Bishop  of  Asti,  and  several  noblemen  of  the 
city,  united  to  attack  the  castrum;  they  captured  a  num- 
ber of  heretics,  and  on  their  refusing  to  return  to  the 
orthodox  faith,  they  sent  them  to  the  stake.^ 

Other  followers  of  the  sect  were  arrested  by  the  officers 
of  Eriberto,  the  Archbishop  of  Milan,  who  endeavored 
to  win  them  back  to  the  Catholic  faith.  Instead  of  being 
converted,  they  tried  to  spread  their  heresy  throughout 
the  city.  The  civil  magistrates,  realizing  their  corrupt- 
ing influence,  had  a  stake  erected  in  the  public  square 
with  a  cross  in  front  of  it;  and  in  spite  of  the  Archbishop's 
protest,  they  required  the  heretics  either  to  reverence 
the  cross  they  had  blasphemed,  or  to  enter  the  flaming 
pile.  Some  were  converted,  but  the  majority  of  them, 
covering  their  faces  with  their  hands,  threw  themselves 
into  the  flames,  and  were  soon  burned  to  ashes.^ 


1  Raoul  Glaber,  Hist.,  lib.  ii,  cap.  xii,  Hisi.  des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p.  23. 

2  Raoul  Glaber,  ibid.,  lib.  iv,  cap.  ii,  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p.  45. 

3  "Quod  cum  civitatis  hujus  majores  laici  comperissent,  rogo  mirabili 
accenso,  cruce  Domini  ab  altere  parte  erecta,  Heriberto  nolente,  illis  omnibus 
eductis,"  etc.  Landulphe,  Historia  Mediolan.,  lib.  ii,  cap.  xxvii,  in  the 
Mon.  Germanics  SS.,  vol.  viii,  pp.  65-66. 


THE   INQUISITION  37 

Few  details  have  come  down  to  us  concerning  the  fate 
of  the  Manicheans  arrested  at  this  time  in  Sardinia  and 
in  Spain ;  exterminati  sunt,  says  a  chronicler.^ 

The  Cathari  of  Toulouse  were  also  arrested,  and  exe- 
cuted: et  ipsi  destructi?  A  few  years  later,  in  11 14,  the 
Bishop  of  Soissons  arrested  a  number  of  heretics,  and  cast 
them  into  prison  until  he  could  make  up  his  mind  how  to 
deal  with  them.  While  he  was  absent  at  Beauvais, 
asking  the  advice  of  his  fellow-bishops  assembled  there 
in  council,  the  populace,  fearing  the  weakness  of  the  clergy, 
attacked  the  prison,  dragged  forth  the  heretics,  and 
burned  them  at  the  stake.^  Guibert  de  Nogent  does  not 
blame  them  in  the  least.  He  simply  calls  attention  to 
"the  just  zeal"  shown  on  this  occasion  by  "the  people 
of  God,"  to  stop  the  spread  of  heresy. 

In  1 144  the  Bishop  of  Liege,  Adalbero  II,  compelled  a 
number  of  Cathari  to  confess  their  heresy;  "he  hoped," 
he  said,  "with  the  grace  of  God  to  lead  them  to  repent." 
But  the  populace,  less  kindly-hearted,  rushed  upon  them, 

1  "Exterminati  sunt,"  says  Raoul  Glaber,  Hist.,  lib.  ii,  cap.  xii,  Hist, 
des  Gaules,  vol.  x,  p.  23. 

Exterminati  may  mean  banished  as  well  as  put  to  death.  The  context, 
however,  seems  to  refer  to  the  death  penalty. 

2  Adhemar  de  Chabannes,  Chron.,  lib.  iii,  cap.  lix,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS., 

vol.  iv,  p.  I43• 
3"Interea  perreximus  ad  Belvacense  concilium  consulturi  episcopos  quid 
facto  opus  esset.  Sed  fideHs  interim  populus,  clericalem  verens  mollitiem 
(notice  these  words  on  "the  weakness  of  the  clergy")  concurrit  ad  ergastulum, 
rapit,  et  subjecto  eis  extra  urbem  igne  pariter  concremavit."  Guibert  de 
Nogent,  De  vita  sua,  lib.  i,  cap.  xv,  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xii,  p.  366. 


38  THE   INQUISITION 

and  proceeded  to  burn  them  at  the  stake;  the  Bishop  had 
the  greatest  difficulty  to  save  the  majority  of  them.  He 
then  wrote  to  Pope  Lucius  II  asking  him  what  was  the 
proper  penalty  for  heresy.^  We  do  not  know  what  answer 
he  received. 

About  the  same  time,  a  similar  dispute  arose  between 
the  Archbishop  and  the  people  of  Cologne  regarding  two 
or  three  heretics  who  had  been  arrested  and  condemned. 
The  clergy  asked  them  to  return  to  the  church.  But  the 
people,  "moved  by  an  excess  of  zeal,"  says  an  historian 
of  the  time,  seized  them,  and  despite  the  Archbishop  and 
his  clerics  led  them  to  the  stake.  "And  marvelous  to 
relate,"  continues  the  chronicler,  "they  suffered  their  tor- 
tures at  the  stake,  not  only  with  patience,  but  with 
joy."^ 

One  of  the  most  famous  heretics  of  the  twelfth  century 
was  Peter  of  Bruys.  His  hostility  toward  the  clergy 
helped  his  propaganda  in  Gascony.  To  show  his  con- 
tempt for  the  Catholic  religion,  he  burned  a  great  num- 
ber of  crosses  one  Good  Friday,  and  roasted  meat  in  the 

i"Hos  turba  turbulenta  raptos  incendio  tradere  deputavit;  sed  nos, 
Dei  favente  misericordia,  pene  omnes  ab  instanti  supplicio,  de  ipsis 
meliora  sperantes,  vix  tamen  eripuimus,"  etc.  Letter  of  the  church  of 
Liege  to  Pope  Lucius  II,  in  Martene,  Amplissima  collectio,  vol.  i,  col. 
776-777. 

2  "Cum  per  triduum  assent  admoniti  et  resipiscere  noluissent,  rapti  sunt 
a  populis  nimio  zelo  permotis,  nobis  (the  Archbishop  and  his  tribunal)  tamen 
invitis,  et  in  ignem  positi  atque  cremati."  Letter  of  Evervin,  provost  of 
Steinfeld  to  St.  Bernard,  cap.  ii,  in  Bernardi  Opera,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  clxxxii, 
col.  677. 


THE    INQUISITION  39 

flames.  This  angered  the  people  against  him.  He  was 
seized  and  burned  at  St.  Giles  about  the  year  1 126.^ 

Henry  of  Lausanne  was  his  most  illustrious  disciple. 
We  have  told  the  story  of  his  life  elsewhere.^  St.  Bernard 
opposed  him  vigorously,  and  succeeded  in  driving  him 
from  the  chief  cities  of  Toulouse  and  the  Albigeois,  where 
he  carried  on  his  harmful  propaganda.  He  was  arrested 
a  short  time  afterwards  (1145  or  1146),  and  sentenced 
to  life-imprisonment  either  in  one  of  the  prisons  of  the 
Archbishop,  or  in  some  monastery  of  Toulouse. 

Arnold  of  Brescia  busied  himself  more  with  questions 
of  discipline  than  with  dogma ;  the  only  reforms  he  advo- 
cated were  social  reforms.^  He  taught  that  the  clergy 
should  not  hold  temporal  possessions,  and  he  endeavored 
to  drive  the  papacy  from  Rome.  In  this  conflict,  which 
involved  the  property  of  ecclesiastics  and  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Church,  he  was,  although  successful  for  a 
time,  fmally  vanquished.^  St.  Bernard  invoked  the  aid 
of  the  secular  arm  to  rid  France  of  him.     Later  on  Pope 

i"Sed  post  rogum  Petri  de  Bruys,  quo  apud  S.  ^gidium  zelus  fidelium 
flammas  dominicas  crucis  ab  eo  succensas  eum  cremando,  ultus  est."  Peter 
the  Venerable,  Letter  to  the  Archbishops  of  Aries  and  Embrum,  etc.,  in  the 
Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xv,  p.  640. 

2  Vie  de  saint  Bernard,  ist  edit.,  Paris,  1895,  vol.  ii,  pp.   218-233. 

3  For  details  concerning  Arnold  of  Brescia,  cf.  Vacandard,  Vie  de  Saint 
Bernard,  vol.  ii,  pp.  235-258,  465-469. 

*  "Dicebat  nee  clericos  proprietatem,  nee  episcopos  regalia,  nee  monachos 
possessiones  habentes  aliqua  ratione  salvari  posse;  cuncta  haec  principis  esse, 
ab  ejusque  beneficentia  in  usum  tantum  laicorum  cedere  oportere."  Otto 
Frising.,  Gesta  Friderici,  lib.  ii,  cap.  xx.  Cf.  Historia  Pontificalis,  in  the 
Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xx,  p.  538. 


40  THE    INQUISITION 

Eugenius  III  excommunicated  him.  He  was  executed 
during  the  pontificate  of  Adrian  IV,  in  1 1 55.  He  was  ar- 
rested in  the  city  of  Rome  after  a  riot  which  was  quelled 
by  the  Emperor  Frederic,  now  the  ally  of  the  Pope,  and 
condemned  to  be  strangled  by  the  prefect  of  the  city. 
His  body  was  then  burned,  and  his  ashes  thrown  into  the 
Tiber,  "for  fear,"  says  a  writer  of  the  time,  "the  people 
would  gather  them  up,  and  honor  them  as  the  ashes  of  a 
martyr."  ^ 

In  1 148,  the  Council  of  Reims  judged  the  case  of  the 
famous  Eon  de  I'Etoile  (Eudo  de  Stella).  This  strange 
individual  had  acquired  a  reputation  for  sanctity  while 
living  a  hermit's  life.  One  day,  struck  by  the  words  of  the 
liturgy.  Per  Eum  qui  venturus  est  judicare  vivos  et  mortuos, 
he  conceived  the  idea  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God.  He 
made  some  converts  among  the  lowest  classes,  who,  not 
content  with  denying  the  faith,  soon  began  to  pillage  the 
churches.  £on  was  arrested  for  causing  these  disturb- 
ances, and  was  brought  before  Pope  Eugenius  HI,  then 
presiding  over  the  Council  of  Reims.  He  was  judged 
insane,  and  in  all  kindness  was  placed  under  the  charge 
of  Suger,  the  Abbot  of  St.  Denis.  He  was  confined  to  a 
monastery,  where  he  died  soon  after.^ 

*  Boso,  Vita  Hadriani,  in  Watterich,  Romanorum  pontificum  VitcB,  vol.  ii, 
pp.  326  et  330;  Otto  Frising.,  Gesia  Friderici,  II,  21  and  23;  Vincent  de  Prague, 
in  Watterich,  vol.  ii,  p.  349,  note;  Geroch  Reichersberg,  De  Investigatione 
Antichristi,  lib.  i,  cap.  xlii;  cf.  p.  50,  note. 

^  Continuatio  Gemblacettsis,  ad  ann.  1146;    Continuatio  PrcsmonstratensiSf 


THE    INQUISITION  41 

Strangely  enough,  some  of  his  disciples  persisted  in 
believing  in  him;  ''they  preferred  to  die  rather  than  re- 
nounce their  belief/'  says  an  historian  of  the  time.  They 
were  handed  over  to  the  secular  arm,  and  perished  at  the 
stake. ^  In  decreeing  this  penalty,  the  civil  power  was 
undoubtedly  influenced  by  the  example  of  Robert  the 
Pious. 

It  is  easy  to  determine  the  responsibility  of  the  Church, 
i.e.  her  bishops  and  priests,  in  this  series  of  executions 
(1020  to  1 1 50).  At  Orleans,  the  populace  and  the  king 
put  the  heretics  to  death;  the  historians  of  the  time 
tell  us  plainly  that  the  clergy  merely  declared  the  or- 
thodox doctrine.  It  was  the  same  at  Goslar.  At  Asti, 
the  Bishop's  name  appears  with  the  names  of  the  other 
nobles  who  had  the  Cathari  executed,  but  it  seems  cer- 
tain that  he  exercised  no  special  authority  in  the  case. 
At  Milan,  the  civil  magistrates  themselves,  against  the 
Archbishop's  protest,  gave  the  heretics  the  choice  be- 
tween reverencing  the  cross,  and  the  stake. 

At  Soissons,  the  populace,  feeling  certain  that  the  clergy 
would  not  resort  to  extreme  measures,  profited  by  the 
Bishop's  absence  to  burn  the  heretics  they  detested.     At 

ad  annum  1148,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  vi,  pp.  452-454;  Robert  Du 
Mont,  Chronicon,  ad  ann.  1148,  ed.  Delisle,  vol.  i,  p.  248;  William  of 
Newbridge,  Chron.,  lib.  i,  cap.  xix;  Otto  Frising,  Gesta  Frederici,  lib.  i,  cap. 
liv-lv.     Cf.  Schmidt,  Histoire  des  Cathares,  vol.  i,  p.  49- 

i"Curice  prius  et  postea  ignibus  traditi  ardere  potius  quam  ad  vitam 
corrigi  maluerunt."     William  of  Newbridge,  i,  xix. 


42  THE   INQUISITION 

Liege,  the  Bishop  managed  to  save  a  few  heretics  from 
the  violence  of  the  angry  mob.  At  Cologne,  the  Arch- 
bishop was  not  so  successful;  the  people  rose  in  their 
anger  and  burned  the  heretics  before  they  could  be 
tried.  Peter  of  Bruys,  and  the  Manichean  at  Cambrai 
were  both  put  to  death  by  the  people.  Arnold  of 
Brescia,  deserted  by  fortune,  fell  a  victim  to  his  political 
adversaries;  the  prefect  of  Rome  was  responsible  for  his 
execution.^ 

In  a  word,  in  all  these  executions,  the  Church  either  kept 
aloof,  or  plainly  manifested  her  disapproval. 

During  this  period,  we  know  of  only  one  bishop,  Theod- 
win  of  Liege,  who  called  upon  the  secular  arm  to  punish 
heretics.^  This  is  all  the  more  remarkable  because  his 
predecessor  Wazo  and  his  successor,  Adalbero  II,  both 

1  The  case  of  Arnold,  however,  is  not  so  clear.  The  Annales  Augustani 
minores  (Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  x,  p.  8)  declare  that  the  Pope  hanged  the 
rebel.  Another  anonymous  writer  (cf.  Tanon,  Hisi.  dcs  tribunaux  de  ring. 
en  France,  p.  456,  n.  2)  says,  with  more  probability,  that  Adrian  merely 
degraded  him.  According  to  Otto  of  Freisingen  {Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xx, 
p.  404),  Arnold  principis  examini  reservatus  est,  ad  ultimum  a  prcefecto  Urbis 
ligno  adactiis.  Finally,  Geroch  de  Reichersberg  tells  us  {De  investigatione 
Antkhristi,  lib.  i,  cap.  xlii,  ed.  Scheibelberger,  1875,  PP-  88-89)  that  Arnold 
was  taken  from  the  ecclesiastical  prison  and  put  to  death  by  the  servants  of 
the  Roman  prefect.  In  any  case,  politics  rather  than  religion  was  the  cause 
of  his  death. 

2  In  1050,  two  years  after  the  death  of  Wazo,  he  wrote  to  the  king  of  France, 
asking  him  to  assemble  a  council  to  judge  confessed  heretics:  "Quamquam 
hujusmodi  homines  nequaquam  oporteat  audiri;  neque  tarn  est  pro  illis 
concilium  celebrandum  quam  de  illorum  supplicio  exquirendum."  Hist, 
des  Gaules,  vol.  xi,  p.  498.  Do  these  words  imply  the  death  penalty?  It 
seems  not,  for  in  that  case  he  would  not  have  said:  de  supplicio  ex- 
quirendum. 


THE    INQUISITION  43 

protested  in  word  and  deed  against  the  cruelty  of  both 
sovereign  and  people. 

Wazo,  his  biographer  tells  us,  strongly  condemned  the 
execution  of  heretics  at  Goslar,  and  had  he  been  there 
would  have  acted  as  St.  Martin  of  Tours  in  the  case  of 
Priscillian.i  |-jJ5  j-gpiy  to  the  letter  of  the  Bishop  of 
Chalons  reveals  his  inmost  thoughts  on  the  subject.  "To 
use  the  sword  of  the  civil  authority,"  he  says,  "against 
the  Manicheans,2  jg  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  Church, 
and  the  teaching  of  her  divine  founder.  The  Savior 
ordered  us  to  let  the  cockle  grow  with  the  good  grain 
until  the  harvest  time,  lest  in  uprooting  the  cockle  we 
uproot  also  the  wheat  with  it.^  Moreover,  continues 
Wazo,  those  who  are  cockle  to-day  may  be  converted  to- 
morrow, and  be  garnered  in  as  wheat  at  the  harvest  time. 
Therefore  they  should  be  allowed  to  live.  The  only  pen- 
alty we  should  use  against  them  is  excommunication."^ 

The  Bishop  of  Liege,  quoting  this  parable  of  Christ 
which  St.  Chrysostom  had  quoted  before  him,  interprets 
it  in  a  more  liberal  fashion  than  the  Bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople. For  he  not  only  condemns  the  death  penalty, 
but  all  recourse  to  the  secular  arm. 

Peter  Cantor,  one  of  the  best  minds  of  northern  France 

1  Vita  Vasonis,  cap  xxv  et  xxvi,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cxlii,  col.  753. 
2 "  An  terrense  potestatis  gladio  in  eos  sit  animadvertendum  necne." 
Ibid.,  col.  752. 

^  Matt.  xiii.  29-30. 

4  Viia  Vasonis,  loc.  cii.,  col.  753. 


44  THE   INQUISITION 

in  the  twelfth  century,  also  protested  against  the  inflic- 
tion of  the  death  penalty  for  heresy,  ''Whether,"  he  says, 
"the  Cathari  are  proved  guilty  of  heresy,  or  whether  they 
freely  admit  their  guilt,  they  ought  not  to  be  put  to  death, 
unless  they  attack  the  Church  in  armed  rebellion."  For 
the  Apostle  said:  "A  man  that  is  a  heretic,  after  the 
first  and  second  admonition,  avoid";  he  did  not  say: 
"Kill  him."  "Imprison  heretics  if  you  will,  but  do  not 
put  them  to  death."  ^ 

Geroch  of  Reichersberg,  a  famous  German  of  the  same 
period,  a  disciple  and  friend  of  St.  Bernard,  speaks  in  a 
similar  strain  of  the  execution  of  Arnold  of  Brescia.  He 
was  most  anxious  that  the  Church,  and  especially  the 
Roman  curia,  should  not  be  held  responsible  for  his  death. 
"The  priesthood,"  he  says,  "ought  to  refrain  from  the 
shedding  of  blood."  There  is  no  doubt  whatever  that 
this  heretic  taught  a  wicked  doctrine,  but  banishment, 
imprisonment,  or  some  similar  penalty  would  have  been 
ample  punishment  for  his  wrong-doing,  without  sentencing 
him  to  death.^ 

St.  Bernard  had  also  asked  that  Arnold  be  banished. 
The  execution  of  heretics  at  Cologne  gave  him  a  chance 

i"Ait  enim  Apostolus:  HEereticum  hominem  post  trinam  admonitionem 
devita  (Tit.  iii,  lo).  Non  ait:  occide  .  .  .  Recludendi  ergo  sunt,  non  occi- 
dendi."      Verbu7n  abbreviatum,  cap.  Ixxviii,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccv,  col.  231. 

2  ' '  Quern  ego  vellem  pro  tali  doctrina  sua  quamvis  prava  vel  exsilio  vel 
carcere  aut  alia  pasna  prceter  mortem  punitum  esse,  vel  saltern  taliter  occisum 
ut  Romana  Ecclesia  seu  curia  ejus  necis  quajstione  careat."  De  investiga- 
tione  Antkhristi,  lib.  i,  cap.  xlii,  ed.  Scheibelberger,  1875,  PP-  88-89. 


THE   INQUISITION  45 

to  state  his  views  on  the  suppression  of  heresy.  The 
courage  with  which  these  fanatics  met  death  rather 
disconcerted  Evervin,  the  provost  of  Steinfeld,  who  wrote 
the  Abbot  of  Clairvaux  for  an  explanation.^ 

"Their  courage,"  he  replies,  "arose  from  mere  stub- 
bornness; the  devil  inspired  them  with  this  constancy 
you  speak  of,  just  as  he  prompted  Judas  to  hang  him- 
self. These  heretics  are  not  real  but  counterfeit  martyrs. 
{perfidice  martyres).  But  while  I  may  approve  the  zeal  of 
the  people  for  the  faith,  I  cannot  at  all  approve  their 
excessive  cruelty;  for  faith  is  a  matter  of  persuasion,  not 
of  force:  fides  suadenda  est,  non  imponenda."  ^ 

On  principle,  the  Abbot  of  Clairvaux  blames  the 
bishops  and  even  the  secular  princes,  who  through  in- 
difference or  less  worthy  reasons  fail  to  hunt  for  the  foxes 
who  are  ravaging  the  vineyard  of  the  Savior.  But  once 
the  guilty  ones  have  been  discovered,  he  declares  that 
only  kindness  should  be  used  to  win  them  back.  "Let 
us  capture  them  by  arguments  and  not  by  force."  ^  i.e. 
let  us  first  refute  their  errors,  and  if  possible  bring  them 
back  into  the  fold  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

If  they  stubbornly  refuse  to  be  converted,  let  the  bishop 
excommunicate   them,   to   prevent    their   doing   further 

1  Evervin's  letter  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  clxxxii,  col.  676  and  seq. 

2/»  Cantica,  Sermo  Ixiv,  n.  12. 

3  "Capiantur,  non  armis,  sed  argumentis."  In  Cantica,  Sermo  Ixiv,  n.  8- 
Lactantius  had  likewise  said:  "Verbis  melius  quam  verberibus  res  agenda 
est."     Divin.  Institut.,  lib.  v,  cap.  xx. 


46  THE   INQUISITION 

injury;  if  occasion  require  it,  let  the  civil  power  arrest  them 
and  put  them  in  prison.  Imprisonment  is  a  severe  enough 
penalty,  because  it  prevents  their  dangerous  propaganda :  ^ 
aut  corrigendi  sunt,  ne  pereant;  aut,  ne  perimant,  coercendi? 
St.  Bernard  was  always  faithful  to  his  own  teaching,  as 
we  learn  from  his  mission  in  Languedoc.^ 

Having  ascertained  the  views  of  individual  church- 
men, we  now  turn  to  the  councils  of  the  period,  and  find 
them  voicing  the  self-same  teaching.  In  1049,  ^he  council 
held  at  Reims  by  Pope  Leo  IX  declared  all  heretics  ex- 
communicated, but  said  nothing  of  any  temporal  penalty, 
nor  did  it  empower  the  secular  princes  to  aid  in  the  sup- 
pression of  heresy.* 

The  Council  of  Toulouse  in  1 1 19,  presided  over  by  Ca- 
lixtus  II,  and  the  General  Council  of  the  Lateran,  in 
1 139,  were  a  little  more  severe;  they  not  only  issued  a 
solemn  bull  of  excommunication  against  heretics,  but 
ordered  the  civil  power  to  prosecute  them:  per  potestates 
exteras  coerceri  prcecipimus.^    This  order  was,  undoubtedly 

1  "  Subversores  invictis  rationibus  convincantur,  ut  vel  emendentur  ipsi, 
si  fieri  potest;  vel,  si  non,  perdant  auctoritatem  facultatemque  alios  subver- 
tendi."     De  Consideratione,  lib.  iii,  cap.  i,  n.  3. 

2  Ibid.;  cf.  Ep.  241  and  242.  For  more  details,  cf.  Vacandard  Vie  de 
Saint  Bernard,  vol.  ii,  pp.  211-216,  461-462. 

3  Cf.  Vacandard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  217-234.  Read  his  letter  to  his 
secretary  Geoffroy,  Bernardi  Vita,  lib.  vi,  pars  3,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  clxxxv, 
col.  410-416. 

^  Cf.  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  ix,  col.  1042. 

^  Council  of  Toulouse,  can.  3,  Labbe,  vol.  x,  col.  857;  Council  of  Lateran, 
can.  23,  ibid.,  col.  1008. 


THE   INQUISITION  47 

an  answer  to  St.  Bernard's  request  of  Louis  VII  to  banish 
Arnold  from  his  kingdom.  The  only  penalty  referred  to 
by  both  these  councils  was  imprisonment. 

The  Council  of  Reims  in  1 148,  presided  over  by  Eugenius 
III,  did  not  even  speak  of  this  penalty,  but  simply  for- 
bade secular  princes  to  give  support  or  asylum  to  heretics.^ 
We  know,  moreover,  that  at  this  council  Eon  de  TEtoile 
was  merely  sentenced  to  the  seclusion  of  a  monastery. 

In  fact,  the  executions  of  heretics  which  occurred  during 
the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries  were  due  to  the  impulse 
of  the  moment.  As  an  historian  has  remarked:  "These 
heretics  were  not  punished  for  a  crime  against  the  law; 
for  there  was  no  legal  crime  of  heresy  and  no  penalty 
prescribed.  But  the  men  of  the  day  adopted  what  they 
considered  a  measure  of  public  safety,  to  put  an  end  to 
a  public  danger."  ^ 

Far  from  encouraging  the  people  and  the  princes  in 
their  attitude,  the  Church  through  her  bishops,  teachers, 
and  councils  continued  to  declare  that  she  had  a  horror 
of  bloodshed:  A  domo  sacerdotis  sanguinis  questio  remota 
sit,  writes  Geroch  of  Reichersberg.^     Peter  Cantor  also 

1  Can.  18,  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  x,  col.  1113. 

2  Julien  Havet,  L'heresie  et  le  bras  seculier  an  moyen  dge,  in  *his  CEuvres, 
vol.  ii,  p.  134.  Still  certain  canonists,  like  Anselm  of  Lucca  and  the  author 
of  the  Panormia,  declare  about  this  time  that  the  death  penalty  may  be 
inflicted  upon  heretics  (cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  453,  454).  at  least  upon 
Manicheans.  But  these  writers  had  no  practical  influence  outside  the 
schola. 

^  De  investigatione  Antichristi,  Hb.  i,  cap.  xlii,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  8S-89. 


48  THE   INQUISITION 

insists  on  the  same  idea.  "  Even  if  they  are  proved  guilty 
by  the  judgment  of  God,"  he  writes,  "the  Cathari  ought 
not  to  be  sentenced  to  death,  because  this  sentence  is  in  a 
way  ecclesiastical,  being  made  always  in  the  presence  of 
a  priest.  If  then  they  are  executed,  the  priest  is  respon- 
sible for  their  death,  for  he  by  whose  authority  a  thing 
is  done  is  reponsible  therefor:  quia  illud  ah  eo  fit,  cujus 
audoritate  fit."  ^ 

Was  excommunication  to  be  the  only  penalty  for 
heresy?  Yes,  answered  Wazo,  Leo  IX,  and  the  Council  of 
Reims  in  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century.  But  later  on 
the  growth  of  the  evil  induced  the  churchmen  of  the  time 
to  call  upon  the  aid  of  the  civil  power.  They  thought 
that  the  Church's  excommunication  required  a  temporal 
sanction.  They  therefore  called  upon  the  princes  to 
banish  heretics  from  their  dominions,  and  to  imprison 
those  who  refused  to  be  converted.  Such  was  the  theory 
of  the  twelfth  century. 

We  must  not  forget,  however,  that  the  penalty  of  im- 
prisonment, which  was  at  first  a  monastic  punishment, 
had  two  objects  in  view:  to  prevent  heretics  from  spread- 
ing their  doctrines,  and  to  give  them  an  opportunity  of 
atoning  for  their  sins.  In  the  minds  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical judges,  it  possessed  a  penitential,  almost  a  sacra- 

^  He  was  discussing  the  consequences  of  a  "judgment  of  God,"  or  ordeal, 
Verbum  abbreviatum,  cap.  Ixxviii,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccv,  col.  231. 


THE   INQUISITION  49 

mental  character.  In  a  period  when  all  Europe  was 
Catholic,  it  could  well  supplant  exile  and  banishment, 
which  were  the  severest  civil  penalties  after  the  death 
penalty. 


CHAPTER  IV 
FOURTH   PERIOD 
From  Gratian  to  Innocent  III 

The  Influence  of  the  Canon  Law,  and  the  Revival 
OF  THE  Roman  Law 

The  development  of  the  Canon  law  and  the  revival 
of  the  Roman  law  could  not  but  exercise  a  great  influence 
upon  the  minds  of  princes  and  churchmen  with  regard 
to  the  suppression  of  heresy;  in  fact  they  were  the  cause 
of  a  legislation  of  persecution,  which  was  adopted  by 
every  country  of  Christendom. 

In  the  beginning  of  this  period,  which  we  date  from 
Gratian,^  the  prosecution  of  heresy  was  still  carried  on,  in 
a  more  or  less  irregular  and  arbitrary  fashion,  according 
to  the  caprice  of  the  reigning  sovereign,  or  the  hasty 
violence  of  the  populace.  But  from  this  time  forward 
we  shall  see  it  carried  on  in  the  name  of  both  the  canon  and 
the  civil  law:  secundum  canonicas  et  legitimas  sanctiones, 
as  a  Council  of  Avignon  puts  it.^ 

iThe  Decree  of  Gratian  was  written  about  1140.  Cf.  Paul  Fournier, 
Les  origines  du  Decret  de  Gr alien  in  the  Revue  d'histoire  et  de  litter ature  reli- 
gieuses,  vol.  iii,  1898,  p.  280. 

2  This  council  was  held  in  1209,  d'Achery^  Spicilegium,  in-fol.,  vol.  i, 
p.  704,  col.  I. 

50 


THE   INQUISITION  51 

In  Germany  and  France,  especially  in  northern  France, 
the  usual  punishment  was  the  stake.  We  need  not  say 
much  of  England,  for  heresy  seems  to  have  made  but  one 
visit  there  in  1166.^  In  1160,  a  German  prince,  whose 
name  is  unknown,  had  several  Cathari  beheaded.^  Others 
were  burned  at  Cologne  in  1163.^  The  execution  of  the 
heretics  condemned  at  Vezelai  by  the  Abbot  of  Vezelai 
and  several  bishops  forms  quite  a  dramatic  picture. 

When  the  heretics  had  been  condemned,  the  Abbot, y' 
addressing  the  crowd,  said:    "My  brethren,  what  punish- 
ment should  be  inflicted  upon  those  who  refuse  to  be 
converted?"     All  replied:  "Burn  them."     "Burn  them." 
Their  wishes  were  carried  out.    Two  abjured  their  heresy, 

1  William  of  Newbridge  (Renun  anglic,  lib.  ii,  cap.  xiii)  relates  that  in 
1 1 66  thirty  heretics  appeared  in  England,  and  that  the  Bishops  to  stop  their 
propaganda  eos  corporali  disciplincB  subdendos  cailwlico  principi  tradiderunt. 
King  Henry  II  had  them  branded  on  the  forehead  with  a  red-hot  iron,  and 
publicly  flogged;  he  then  banished  them,  forbidding  any  one  to  lodge  or 
succor  them.  As  this  happened  in  the  winter  time,  they  were  frozen  to  death. 
"This  pious  severity,"  adds  the  chronicler,  "not  only  freed  England  from 
the  pest  of  heresy,  but,  by  the  fear  it  inspired,  kept  heretics  from  ever  entering 
the  kingdom."  Cf.  Raoul  de  Diceto,  Imagines  historiorum,  ed.  Stubbs, 
vol.  i,  p.  318.  It  has  been  questioned  whether  this  penalty  of  branding  with 
a  red-hot  iron  was  not  inspired  by  the  canon  which  Martene  attributes  to  the 
Council  of  Reims  in  1157  (Amplissima  collectio,  vol.  vii,  col.  74),  and  which 
decrees  that  obstinate  heretics  ferro  calido  frontem  et  fades  signati  pellantur. 
But  the  authencity  of  this  conciliar  decree  has  been  denied  by  an  eminent 
critic,  Julien  Havet,  op.  cit.,  in  his  CEuvres,  vol.  ii,  p.  137-  That  is  why  we 
do  not  attach  much  importance  to  it.  Besides,  no  civil  or  canon  law  has 
been  discovered  which  decrees  such  a  penalty. 

2Aubri  de  Trois  Fontaines,  Chron.,  ad.  ann.  1160,  Mon.  German.  SS. 
vol.  xxiii,  p.  845. 

^Annates   Colon,  maximi,  ad    ann.    1163,  Mon.    German.    SS.,    vol.   vi, 

p.  778. 


52  THE   INQUISITION 

and  were  pardoned,  the  other  seven  perished  at  the 
stake.* 

Philip,  Count  of  Flanders,  was  particularly  cruel  in 
prosecuting  heretics.^  He  had  an  able  auxiliary  also  in 
the  Archbishop  of  Reims,  Guillaume  aux  Blanches-Mains. 
The  chronicle  of  Anchin  tells  us  that  they  sent  to  the  stake 
a  great  many  nobles  and  people,  clerics,  knights,  peasants, 
young  girls,  married  women,  and  widows,  whose  property 
they  confiscated  and  shared  between  them.^  This  oc- 
curred in  1 183.  Some  years  before.  Archbishop  Guillaume 
and  his  council  had  sent  two  heretical  women  to  the 
stake."* 

Hugh,  Bishop  of  Auxerre  (i  183-1206),  prosecuted  the 
neo-Manicheans  with  equal  severity;  he  confiscated  the 

^"Adducti  sunt  in  medium  maximae  multitudinis  quae  totum  claustrum 
occupabat,  stante  Guichardo  Lugdunensi  archiepiscopo  et  Bernardo  Niver- 
nensium  episcopo,  magistro  quoque  Galterio  Landunensi  episcopo,  cum 
Guillelmo  Vizeliacensi  abbate  .  .  .  Abbas  dixit  omnibus  qui  aderant:  Quid 
ergo,  fratres,  vobis  videtur  faciendum  de  his  qui  adhuc  in  sua  perseverant 
obstinatione  ?  Responderunt  omnes:  Comburantur!  comburantur!"  etc. 
Hugo  Pictav.,  Historia  Vezeliacensis  monasterii,  lib.  iv,  ad  finem,  Hist, 
des  Gaules,  vol.  xii,  pp.  343-344. 

2*'Illo  in  tempore  ubique  exquirebantur  et  perimebantur  (haeretici),  sed 
maxime  a  Philippo  comite  Flandrensium,  qui  justa  crudelitate  eos  immiseri- 
corditer  puniebat."  Raoul  de  Coggeshall,  in  Rerum  Britann.  medii  avi 
Scriptores,  ed.  Stevenson,  p.  122. 

3  "Tunc  decretalis  sententia  ab  archiepiscopo  et  comite  prefixa  est  ut 
deprehensi  incendio  traderentur,  substantia  vero  eorum  sacerdoti  et  principi 
resignarentur."  Sigeberti  Continuatio  Aquicinctina,  ad.  ann.  1183,  in  the 
Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  vi,  p.  421. 

*"Quae,  cum  salutaribus  monitis  nulla  ratione  acquievissent  .  .  .  ,  com- 
muni  concilio  decretum  est  ut  flammis  concremarentur."  Raoul  de  Cogges- 
hall, loc.  cit.;  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xviii,  p.  92. 


THE    INQUISITION  53 

property  of  some,  banished  others,  and  sent  several  to 
the  stake. ^ 

The  reign  of  Philip  Augustus  was  marked  by  many 
executions.^  Eight  Cathari  were  sent  to  the  stake  at 
Troyes  in  1200,^  one  at  Nevers  in  1201,*  and  several  others 
at  Braisne-sur-Vesle  in  1204.^  A  most  famous  case  was 
the  condemnation  of  the  followers  of  the  heretic,  Amaury 
de  Beynes.  "Priests,  clerics,  men  and  women  belonging 
to  the  sect,  were  brought  before  a  council  at  Paris; they 
were  condemned  and  handed  over  to  the  secular  court  of 
King  Philip."  The  king  was  absent  at  the  time.  On 
his  return  he  had  them  all  burned  outside  the  walls  of  the 
city.* 

In  1 1 63  a  council  of  Tours  enacted  a  decree  fixing  the 

1  Robert  d'Auxerre,  Chron.,  ad.  ann.  1205,  in  the  Hisi.  des  Gaules,  vol. 
xviii,  p.  273. 

2  Quos  Popelicanos  vulgari  nomine  dicunt 


Convincebantur  et  mittebantur  in  ignem. 


says  Guillaume  le  Breton,  Philippeis,  lib.  i,  verses  407-410. 

3Aubri  de  Trois-Fontaines,  ad.  ann.  1200,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol. 
xxiii,  p.  878. 

4  Cf.  Hisi.  des  Gaules,  vol.  xviii,  pp.  264  and  729. 

5  Chron.  anonymi  Laudunensis  canonici,  in  the  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xviii, 

P-  713- 

6  "Traditi  fuerunt  curiae  Philippi  regis,  qui  tanquam  rex  Christianissimus 
et  catholicus,  vocatis  apparitoribus,  fecit  omnes  cremari,  et  cremati  sunt 
extra  portam,  in  loco  qui  nuncupatur  Campellus,"  etc.  Hist,  des  Gaules, 
vol.  xvii,  pp.  83-84.  The  women  were  spared.  Cf .  Caesarius  of  Heisterbach, 
Dist.  V,  cap.  xxii,  who  tells  us  that  the  king  was  absent  when  the  heretics 
were  condemned.  For  other  references,  cf.  Julien  Havet,  op.  cit.,  p.  142, 
note. 


54  THE    INQUISITION 

punishment  of  heresy.  Of  course  it  had  in  view  chiefly 
the  Cathari  of  Toulouse  and  Gascony:  "  If  these  wretches 
are  captured,"  it  says,  "the  Catholic  princes  are  to  im- 
prison them  and  confiscate  their  property."^ 

This  canon  was  applied  probably  for  the  first  time  at 
Toulouse  in  1178.  The  Bishop  began  proceedings  against 
several  heretics,  among  them  a  rich  noble  named  Pierre 
Mauran,  who  was  summoned  before  his  tribunal,  and 
condemned  to  make  a  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy  Land.  His 
property  was  confiscated,  although  later  on  when  he 
professed  repentance  it  was  restored  to  him,  on  condition 
that  he  dismantle  the  towers  of  his  castles,  and  pay  the 
Count  of  Toulouse  a  fine  of  five  hundred  pounds  of  silver.^ 

In  the  meantime  the  Cathari  increased  with  alarming 
rapidity  throughout  this  region.  Count  Raymond  V 
(1148-1194),  wishing  to  strike  terror  into  them,  enacted 
a  law  which  decreed  the  confiscation  of  their  property 
and  death.  The  people  of  Toulouse  quoted  this  law  later 
on  in  a  letter  to  King  Pedro  of  Aragon  to  justify  their 
sending  heretics  to  the  stake,^  and  when  the  followers  of 

1  "Illi  vero,  si  deprehensi  fuerint,  per  catholicos  principes  custodut  manci- 
pati,  omnium  bonorum  amissione  mulctentur."  Can.  4,  Labbe,  Concilia, 
vol.  X,  col.  1419;  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xiv,  p.  431. 

2  For  the  details  of  this  case,  cf .  A  letter  of  Henry,  Abbot  of  Clairvaux, 
Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cciv,  p.  235  and  seq. 

3"Scientes  preterito  processu  longi  temporis  dominum  comitem  patrem 
modemi  temporis  comitis  ab  universe  Tolose  populo  accepisse  in  mandatis 
instrument)  inde  composito,  quod  si  quis  hereticus  inventus  esset  in  Tolosana 
iirbe  vel  suburbio,  cum  receptatore  sue  pariter  ad  supplicium  traderetur, 
publicatis  possessionibus  utriusqiie;  unde  multos  combussimtis,  et  adhuc  cum 


THE    INQUISITION  55 

Simon  de  Montfort  arrived  in  southern  France,  in 
1209,  they  followed  the  example  of  Count  Ravtnond 
by  sending  heretics  to  the  stake  ever\-where  they 
went.^ 

The  authenticity  of  this  law  has  been  questioned,  on 
account  of  its  unheard-of  severity.-  But  Pedro  II,  King 
of  Aragon  and  Count  of  Barcelona,  enacted  a  law  in  1 197 
which  was  just  as  terrible.  He  banished  the  W'aldenses 
and  all  other  heretics  from  his  dominions,  ordering  them 
to  depart  before  Passion  Sunday  of  the  following  year 
(March  23,  1198).  After  that  day,  every  heretic  found 
in  the  kingdom  or  the  county  was  to  be  sent  to  the  stake, 
and  his  property  confiscated.^  It  is  worthy  of  remark 
that  in  the  king's  mind  the  stake  was  merely  a  subsidiary 
penalty. 

In  enacting  this  severe  law,  Pedro  of  Aragon  declared 

invenimus  idem  facere  non  cessamus."  Letter  written  in  121 1  by  the  dty 
of  Toulouse  to  King  Pedro  of  Aragon,  in  Teulet,  LayeUes  du  tresor  des  Chartts, 
vol.  i,  p.  36S. 

1  On  this  expedition,  cf.  Achille  Luchaire,  op.  est.,  ch.  It.  and  t;  Tanon, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  2S,  29. 

'  Julien  Havet,  op.  cU.,  p.  153,  note.  The  reasons  he  gives  for  doubting 
it  are  far  from  convincing.  He  starts  with  the  idea  that  Raymond  V,  all  his 
life,  favored  the  heretics.  Luchaire  holds  the  opposite  view  {op.  cii.,  p.  46. 
Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  447). 

3  "\'aldenses  .  .  .  et  omnes  alios  luereticos  .  .  .  ab  omni  regno  et  potes- 
tadvo  nostro  tanquam  inimicos  crucis  Christi  christian£eque  fidei  violatores 
et  nostras  regnique  nostri  pubiicos  hostes  esire  et  fugere  districte  et  irremeabiliter 
praedpimus  .  .  .  Et  si  post  tempus  praefiTum  (Dominicain  Passi<Hiis  Domini) 
aliqui  in  tota  terra  nostra  eos  invenerint,  duobus  partibus  renun  suanmi 
confiscatis,  tertia  sit  inventoris;  corpora  eonim  ignibus  crementxir."  De 
Marca,  Marca  Hispamca,  coL  1384. 


56  THE   INQUISITION 

that  he  was  moved  by  zeal  for  the  public  welfare,'  and 
"had  simply  obeyed  the  canons  of  the  Holy  Roman 
Church." '  With  the  exception  of  the  death  penalty  by 
the  stake,  his  reference  to  the  canon  law  is  perfectly 
accurate.  Pope  Alexander  III,  who  had  been  present  at 
the  Council  of  Tours  in  1163,  renewed,  at  the  Lateran 
Council  in  1179,  the  decrees  already  enacted  against  the 
heretics  of  central  France.  He  considered  the  Cathari, 
the  Brabangons,  etc.,  disturbers  of  the  public  welfare, 
and  therefore  called  upon  the  princes  to  protect  by  force 
of  arms  their  Christian  subjects  against  the  outrages  of 
these  heretics.  The  princes  were  to  imprison  all  heretics 
and  confiscate  their  property.^  The  Pope  granted  indul- 
gences to  all  who  carried  on  this  pious  work. 

In  1 184,  Pope  Lucius  III,  in  union  with  the  emperor 
Frederic  Barbarossa,  adopted  at  Verona  still  more  vigor- 
ous measures.  Heretics  were  to  be  excommunicated, 
and  then  handed  over  to  the  secular  arm,  which  was  to 

1  Notice  the  italicized  words  in  the  preceding  note. 

2  "Sacrosanctce  Romanas  Ecclesias  canonibus  obtemperantes,  qui  haereticos 
a  consortio  Dei  et  sanctse  Ecclesias  et  catholicorum  omnium  exclusos  ubique 
damnandos  ac  persequendos  censuerunt."     Loc.  cit. 

3  The  princes  are  invited  "ut  tantis  cladibus  se  viriliter  opponant  et  contra 
eos  (haereticos)  armis  populum  Christianum  tueantur.  Confiscentur  eorum 
bona  et  liberum  sit  principibus  hujusmodi  homines  subjicere  servituti." 
Can.  27,  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  x,  col.  1522.  The  Council  of  Montpellier  in 
1 195  presided  over  by  the  legate  of  Pope  Celestine  III  renewed  this  decree  in 
nearly  the  same  terms:  "Constituit  ut  bona  hujusmodi  pestilentium  hominum 
publicentur  et  ipsi  nihilominus  servituti  subdantur."  Labbe,  Concilia, 
vol.  X,  col.  1796.  The  word  servitus  (subjicere  servituti  and  servituti  sub- 
dantur) used  by  both  councils  means  imprisonment  (Julien  Havet,  op.  cit., 


THE   INQUISITION  57 

inflict  upon  them  the  punishment  they  deserved  (animad- 
versio  dehita).  *  The  Emperor  decreed  the  imperial  ban 
against  them.^ 

This  imperial  ban  was,  as  Picker  has  pointed  out,  a 
very  severe  penalty  in  Italy;  for  it  comprised  banish- 
ment, the  confiscation  of  the  property,  and  the  destruction 
of  the  houses  of  the  condemned,  public  infamy,  the  in- 
ability to  hold  public  oifice,  etc.^  This  is  beyond  ques- 
tion the  penalty  the  King  of  Aragon  alluded  to  in  his 

p.  154).  It  is  equivalent  to  the  cusiodicB  mancipati  of  the  Council  of 
Tours  in  1163.  As  Alexander  III  presided  over  both  councils  (Tours  and 
Lateran)  it  is  most  probable  they  decreed  the  same  penalty. 

1  "Si  clericus  est  (hasreticus),  vel  cujuslibet  religionis  obumbratione  fus- 
catus,  totius  ecclesiastici  ordinis  prerogativa  nudetur,  et  sic  omni  officio  et 
beneficio  spoliatus  secularis  relinquatur  arbitrio  potestatis  animadvcrsione 
debita  puniendus,  nisi  continue  post  deprehensionem  erroris  ad  fidei  catholicae 
unitatem  sponte  recurrere  et  errorem  suum  ad  arbitrium  episcopi  regionis 
publice  consenserit  abjurare,  et  satisfactionem  congruam  exhibere.  Laicus 
autem  nisi,  prout  dictum  est,  abjurata  heeresi  et  satisfactione  exhibita  con- 
festim  ad  fidem  confugeret  orthodoxam,  secularis  judicis  arbitrio  relinquatur, 
debitam  recepturus  pro  qualitate  jacinoris  ulticnem"  etc.  Canon  27,  inserted 
in  the  Decretals  of  Gregory  IX,  lib'  v,  tit.   vii,  De  hereticis,  cap.  ix. 

2  "Papa  eos  excommunicavit,  imperator  vero  tarn  res  quam  personas 
ipsorum  imperiali  banno  subjecit,"  says  the  Continuatio  Zwetlensis  altera, 
ad  ann.  1184,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,wo\.  ix,  p.  542.  The  council  had  used 
the  words  animadvcrsione  puniendi.  Animadversio  in  the  Roman  law 
signified  the  death  penalty.  Cf.  The  edict  of  Valerian  in  258:  In  continenti 
animadvertentiir.  The  imperial  formula  of  condemnation  seems  to  have 
been:  Gladio  animadverti  placet.  Cf.  Paul  AUard,  Dix  legons  sur  le  martyre, 
Paris,  1906,  p.  269,  n.  I.  But  in  the  Middle  Ages  animadversio  comprised 
different  penalties.  We  notice,  for  example,  that  Frederic  Barbarossa,  in 
accordance  with  the  mind  of  the  church,  decreed  no  greater  punishment  than 
banishment. 

3  Ficker,  Die  gesetzliche  Einfiihrung  der  Todesstrafe  filr  Ketzerei,  in  the 
Mittheilungen  des  Instituts  jur  oesterreichische  Geschichtsjorschung,  vol.  i 
(1880),  pp.  187,  188,  194,  195- 


58  THE   INQUISITION 

enactment.  The  penalty  of  the  stake  which  he  added, 
although  in  conformity  with  the  Roman  law,  was  an  in- 
novation.^ 

The  pontificate  of  Innocent  III,  which  began  in  1198, 
marks  a  pause  in  the  development  of  the  Church's  penal 
legislation  against  heresy.  Despite  his  prodigious  ac- 
tivity, this  Pope  never  dreamt  of  enacting  new  laws,  but 
did  his  best  to  enforce  the  laws  then  in  vogue,  and  to 
stimulate  the  zeal  of  both  princes  and  magistrates  ir, 
the  suppression  of  heresy.^ 

Hardly  had  he  ascended  the  pontifical  throne  when  he 
sent  legates  to  southern  France,  and  wrote  urgent  letters 
full  of  apostolic  zeal  to  the  Archbishops  of  Auch  and  Aix, 
the  Bishop  of  Narbonne,  and  the  King  of  France.  These 
letters,  as  well  as  his  instructions  to  the  legates,  are  sim- 
ilar in  tone:  "Use  against  heretics  the  spiritual  sword 
of  excommunication,  and  if  this  does  not  prove  effec- 
tive, use  the  material  sword.  The  civil  laws  decree  ban- 
ishment and  confiscation;  see  that  they  are  carried 
out."  3 

1  Tanon  has  proved,  however  {op.  cit.,  pp.  433  and  seq.),  that  the  canonists 
had  already  revived  the  legislation  of  the  first  Christian  Emperors  against 
heresy. 

2  JuHen  Havet,  op.  cit.,  p.  155. 

3  "  Ecclesiasticae  districionis  exercendo  rigorem,  et  etiam,  si  necesse  fuerit, 
per  principes  et  populum  eosdem  (ha^reticos)  facias  virtute  matermlis 
gladii  coerceri."  Letter  of  April  i,  1198,  to  the  Archbishop  of  Auch, 
Innocent,  Ep.  i,  81.  "NobiHbus  viris  principibus,  comitibus  et  universis 
baronibus  et  magnatibus  in  vestra  provincia  constitutis  praecipiendo  man- 
damus  et   in   remissionem    injungimus  peccatorum,   ut  .  .  .  postquam    per 


THE    INQUISITION  59 

At  this  time  the  Cathari  were  living  not  only  in  the 
cities  of  Languedoc  and  Provence,  but  some  had  even 
entered  the  papal  States,  v.g.  at  Orvieto  and  Viterbo. 
The  Pope  himself  went  to  these  cities  to  combat  the  evil/ 
and  at  once  saw  the  necessity  of  enacting  special  laws 
against  them.  They  may  be  read  in  his  letters  of  March 
25,  1 199,  and  September  22,  1207,  which  form  a  special 
code  for  the  use  of  the  princes  and  the  podesta.  Here- 
tics were  to  be  branded  with  infamy;  they  were  forbid- 

dictum  fratrem  Rainerium  fuerint  excommunicationis  sententia  innodati, 
eoricm  botia  confiscent  et  de  terra  sua  proscribant;  et,  si  post  interdictum  ejus 
in  terra  ipsorum  praesumpserint  commorari,  gravius  animadvertant  in  eos, 
sicut  decet  principes  christianos."  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Aix,  April  21, 
1 198,  Ep.  194.  The  words  gravius  animadvertant  seem  to  imply  the  death 
penalty,  but  perhaps  the  Pope  merely  meant  imprisonment.  For  in  all  his 
laws,  Innocent  III  never  once  decreed  the  death  penalty.  Nearly  all  histo- 
rians are  agreed  on  this  point,  as  we  will  show  later  on. 

"  Mandamus  ut  vos  fratres  .  .  .  spiritualem  gladium  exeratis;  laici  vero 
bona  eorum  (haereticorum)  confiscent  et  eos  ejiciant  de  terra  sua."  Letter 
of  May  13,  1 198,  to  the  legate  Gui,  Ep.  i,  165.  "Satanae  in  interitum  carnis 
traditas  nuntietis  et  expositas  personas  eorum  et  judicio  seculari,  et  bona 
confiscationi  tradita,"  etc.  Letter  of  May  31,  1204,  to  his  legates,  Ep.  vii, 
71.  Cf.  letter  of  January  29,  1204,  to  the  Bishop  of  Narbonne,  Ep.  vi,  243; 
letter  to  the  King  of  France,  Ep.  vii,  212,  etc.  The  letters  of  Innocent  III 
are  to  be  found  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccxiv-ccxvi. 

1  At  Orvieto,  where  the  Bishop  had  punished  the  heretics  most  severely  after 
a  riot,  Innocent  III  appointed  a  podesta  Piero  Parenzo  to  enforce  the  laws 
and  canons  against  obdurate  heretics:  "ut  paenam  exciperet  legihus  et  canoni- 
bus  constitutam."  The  podesta  "alios  alligavit  ferreis  nexibus  compeditos, 
alios  censuit  publicis  verberibus  flagellandos,  alios  extra  civitatem  ccEgit 
miserabiliter  exulare,  alios  ptena  mulctavit  pecuniae  .  .  .  ,  domus  etiam  fecit 
dirui  plurimorum."  Vita  S.  Petri  Parentii,  cap.  vi,  in  the  Acta  SS.,  maii, 
vol.  v,  p.  87.  On  the  work  and  murder  of  Parenzo,  cf.  Luchaire,  Innocent 
III,  Rome  et  PItalie,  Paris,  1904,  pp.  86-91.  For  Viterbo,  cf.  Gesta  Innocentii, 
cap.  cxxiii,  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccxiv,  col.  clxi;  Ep.  Innocent  ii,  viii,  85  and 
105. 


6o  THE   INQUISITION 

den  to  be  electors,  to  hold  public  office,  to  be  members 
of  the  city  councils,  to  appear  in  court  or  testify,  to 
make  a  will  or  to  receive  an  inheritance;  if  officials  all 
their  acts  were  declared  null  and  void;  and  finally  their 
property  was  to  be  confiscated. 

*'  In  the  territories  subject  to  our  temporal  jurisdiction," 
adds  the  Pope,  "we  declare  their  property  confiscated;  in 
other  places  we  order  the  podesta  and  the  secular  princes 
to  do  the  same,  and  we  desire  and  command  this  law  en- 
forced under  penalty  of  ecclesiastical  censures."  ^ 

We  are  not  at  all  surprised  at  such  drastic  measures, 
when  we  consider  the  agreement  made  by  Lucius  1 1 1  with 
Frederic  Barbarossa,  at  Verona.  But  we  wish  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  reasons  that  Innocent  III  adduced  to  justify 
his  severity,  on  account  of  the  serious  consequences  they 

1 "  Districtius  inhibemus  ne  quis  haereticos  receptare  quomodolibet  vel 
defendere  aut  ipsis  favere  vel  credere  quoquomodo  praesumat  ...  In  terris 
vero  temporali  nostrae  jurisdiction!  subjectis,  bona  eorum  statuimus  publicari; 
et  in  aliis  idem  fieri  praecipimus  per  potestates  at  principes  seculares,  quos  ad 
id  exequendum,  si  forte  negligentes  extiterint,  per  censuram  ecclesiasticam 
appellatione  postposita  compelli  volumus  et  mandamus."  Letter  of  March 
25,  1 199.,  to  the  magistrates  and  people  of  Viterbo.  Ep.  ii,  i.  "Ad  elimi- 
nandam  omnino  de  patrimonio  beati  Petri  hasreticorum  spurcitiam,  servanda 
in  perpetuum  lege  sancimus  ut  quicumque  hjereticus,  et  maxime  Patarenus, 
in  eo  fuerit  inventus,  protinus  capiatur  et  tradatur  seculari  curicc  puniendus 
secundum  legitimas  sanctiones.  Bona  vero  ipsius  omnia  publicentur;  ita  ut 
de  ipsis  unam  partem  percipiat  qui  ceperit  ilium,  alteram  curia  quae  ipsum 
punierit,  tertia  vero  deputetur  ad  constructionem  murorum  illius  terras  ubi 
fuerit  interceptus.  Domus  autem  in  qua  hasreticus  fuerit  receptatus  funditus 
destruatur,  nee  quisquam  earn  reaedificare  praesumat,  sed  fiat  sordium  recepta- 
culum,  quae  fuit  latibulum  perfidorum."  Constitution  of  September  23,  1207, 
Ep.  X,  130. 


THE   INQUISITION  6i 

entailed.  **The  civil  law,"  says  the  Pope,  "  punishes 
traitors  with  confiscation  of  their  property  and  death;  it 
is  only  out  of  kindness  that  the  lives  of  their  children  are 
spared.  All  the  more  then  should  we  excommunicate 
and  confiscate  the  property  of  those  who  are  traitors  to 
the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ;  for  it  is  an  infinitely  greater  sin 
to  offend  the  divine  majesty  than  to  attack  the  majesty 
of  the  sovereign.''  ^ 

Whether  this  comparison  be  justified  or  not,  it  is 
certainly  most  striking.  Later  on  Frederic  II  and  others 
will  quote  it  to  justify  their  severity. 

The  Lateran  Council  in  121 5  made  the  laws  of  Inno-  ^ 
cent  III  canons  of  the  universal  Church;  it  declared  all 
heretics  excommunicated,  and  delivered  them  over  to  the 
State  to  receive  due  punishment.  This  animadversio 
dehita  entailed  banishment  with  all  its  consequences  and 
confiscation.  The  council  also  legislated  against  the 
abettors  of  heresy,  even  if  they  were  princes,  and  ordered 
the  despoiling  of  all  rulers  who  neglected  to  enforce  the 
ecclesiastical  law  in  their  domains.^ 

i"Ut  temporalis  saltern  paena  corripiat  quern  spiritualis  non  corripit 
disciplina.  Cum  enira  secundum  legitimas  sanctiones  reis  IcBse  majestatis 
punitis  capite  bona  confiscentur  eorum,  filiis  suis  vita  solummodo  misericordia 
conservata,  quanto  magis  qui,  aberrantes  in  fide,  Domini  Dei  filium  Jesum 
offendunt,  a  capite  nostro,  quod  est  Christus,  ecclesiastica  debent  districtione 
praecidi  et  bonis  temporalibus  spoliari,  cum  longe  sit  gravius  csternam  quam 
temporalem  ladere  majestatem"  etc.  Letter  of  March  25,  1199,  to  the  magis- 
trates of  Viterbo,  Ep.  ii,  i.  This  text  is  inserted  in  the  Decretals,  cap.  x, 
De  hcereticis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii. 

2"Damnati  vero  praesentibus  scecularibus  potestatibus  aut  eorum  baillivis 


62  THE   INQUISITION 

In  practice,  Innocent  III,  although  very  severe  to- 
wards obdurate  heretics,  was  extremely  kind  to  the  igno- 
rant and  heretics  in  good  faith.  While  he  banished  the 
Patarins  from  Viterbo,^  and  razed  their  houses  to  the 
ground,  he  at  the  same  time  protected,  against  the  tyranny 
of  an  archpriest  of  Verona,  a  society  of  mystics,  the 
Humiliati,  whose  orthodoxy  was  rather  doubtful.^  When, 
after  the  massacre  of  the  Albigenses,  Pope  Innocent  was 
called  upon  to  apply  the  canon  law  in  the  case  of  Ray- 
mond, Count  of  Toulouse,  and  to  transfer  the  patrimony 
of  his  father  to  Simon  de  Montfort,  he  was  the  first  to 
draw  back  from  such  injustice.^  Although  a  framer  of 
severe  laws  against  heresy,  he  was  ready  to  grant  dispen- 
sations, when  occasion  arose. 

We  must  remember  also  that  the  laws  he  enacted 
were  not  at  all  excessive  compared  with  the  strict 
Roman  law,  or  even  with  the  practice  then  in  vogue  in 
France  and  Germany.  It  has  been  justly  said:  "The 
laws  and  letters  of    Innocent    III   never  once    mention 


relinquantur  animadversione  debita  piiniendi,  clericis  prius  a  suis  ordinibus 
degradatis,  ita  quod  bona  hujusmodi  damnatorum,  si  laici  fuerint,  confis- 
centur;  si  vero  clerici,  applicentur  ecclesiis  a  quibus  stipendia  receperunt," 
etc.  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  xi,  col.  148-150;  Decretales,  cap.  xiii,  De  hcereticis, 
lib.  V,  til.  vii. 

^  Gesta  Innocentii,  cap.  cxxiii,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccxiv,  col.  clxi. 

2  "Even  if  they  seem  to  be  a  little  unorthodox,  absolve  them  if  they  are 
willing  to  submit,  and  acknowledge  their  errors." 

Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Verona,  1199.     Ep.  ii,  228;  cf.  Luchaire,  Innocent 
III,  la  croisade  des  Albigeois,  pp.  58-60. 

3  Luchaire,  op.  cit.,  p.  168  and  seq. 


THE   INQUISITION  63 

the  death-penalty  for  heresy.  He  merely  decrees  against 
them  banishment,  and  the  confiscation  of  their  property. 
When  he  speaks  of  having  recourse  to  the  secular  arm, 
he  means  simply  the  force  required  to  carry  out  the  laws 
of  banishment  enacted  by  his  penal  code.  This  code, 
which  seems  so  pitiless  to  us,  was  in  reality  at  that 
time  a  great  improvement  in  the  treatment  of  heretics. 
For  its  special  laws  prevented  the  frequent  outbreaks  of 
popular  vengeance,  which  punished  not  only  confessed 
heretics,  but  also  mere  suspects."  ^ 

In  fact,  the  development  in  the  methods  of  suppressing 
heresy  from  the  eleventh  century  ends  with  Innocent  III 
in  a  code  that  was  far  more  kindly  than  the  cruel  customs 
in  vogue  at  the  time. 

The  death  penalty  of  the  stake  was  common  in  Francev 
in  the  twelfth  century,  and  in  the  beginning  of  the  thir- 

1  Luchaire,  op.  cit.,  pp.  57,  58.  JuHen  Havet  also  says:  "We  must  in  jus- 
tice say  of  Innocent  III  that,  if  he  did  bitterly  prosecute  heretics,  and  every- 
where put  them  under  the  ban,  he  never  demanded  the  infliction  of  the  death 
penalty.  Ficker  has  brought  this  out  very  clearly."  L'heresie  et  le  bras 
seculier,  p.  165,  n.  3.  For  Ficker's  view,  cf.  op.  cit.,  pp.  189-192  {supra, 
p.  68).  That  men  who  were  merely  suspected  of  heresy  were  summarily 
condemned  and  executed,  as  Luchaire  says,  we  have  seen  in  several  instances. 
A  canon  of  Langres  testifies  to  this  fact  in  his  appeal  to  Innocent  III;  "the 
only  reason,"  he  says,  "that  I  did  not  appear  before  the  Bishop  or  the  papal 
delegates  was  the  fear  of  death;  because  in  this  country  (northern  France) 
the  piety  of  the  people  is  so  great  that  they  are  always  ready  to  send  to  the 
stake,  not  only  avowed  heretics,  but  those  merely  suspected  of  heresy." 
(Cf.  Luchaire,  op.  cit.,  pp.  65,  66.) 

Tanon,  on  the  contrary,  maintains  {op.  cit.,  pp.  448-450)  that  Innocent  III 
in  certain  instances  did  require  the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon  here- 
tics.    Only  one  of  the  passages  that  he  adduces  is  at  all  doubtful,  viz.,  the 


64  THE   INQUISITION 

teenth.  Most  of  the  executions  were  due  to  the  pas-^ 
sions  of  the  mob,  although  the  Roman  law  was  in  part 
responsible.  Anselm  of  Lucca  and  the  author  of  the 
Panormia  (Ivo  of  Chartres?)  had  copied  word  for  word 
the  fifth  law  of  the  title  De  Hcereticis  of  the  Justinian 
code,  under  the  rubric:  De  edicto  tmperaiorum  in  damp- 
nationem  hcereticorum}  This  law  which  decreed  the  death 
penalty  against  the  Manicheans  seemed  strictly  applicable 
to  the  Cathari,  who  were  regarded  at  the  time  as  the  direct 
heirs  of  Manicheism,^  Gratian,  in  his  Decree,  main- 
tained the  views  of  St.  Augustine  on  the  penalties  of 
heresy,  viz.,  fine  and  banishment.^  But  some  of  his 
commentators,  especially  Rufinus,  Johannes  Teutonicus, 
and  an  anonymous  writer  whose  work  is  inserted  in 
Huguccio's  great  Summa  of  the  decree,  declared  that 
impenitent  heretics  might  and  even  ought  to  be  put  to 
death.'* 
These   different   works  appeared   before   the    Lateran 

Gravius  animadvertant  in  eos  in  the  Letter  of  April  21,  1198  (^Ep.  i,  94). 
Even  supposing  that  this  did  mean  the  death  penalty,  it  would  not,  properly 
speaking,  be  the  punishment  of  heresy,  but  of  disobedience  to  the  laws  enacted 
against  heresy.  But  in  fact  no  one  can  prove  that  it  does  not  mean  life- 
imprisonment;  cf.  Supra,  p.  59,  n.  2.  In  any  case,  Tanon's  view 
does  not  agree  with  what  we  know  of  the  conduct  and  writings  of  Inno- 
cent III. 

1  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  453-454. 

2Tanon,  p.  9,  n.  i. 

3  Decretum,  2  Pars,  Causa  xxiii,  quest.  4,  6,  7, 

4  Rufinus,  in  his  commentary  on  Causa  23,  quest.  5,  proves  that  "he  who 
has  the  power  of  the  sword,"  has  the  right  to  execute  great  criminals,  and  in 
Causa  24  he  applies  this  principle  to  heretics:  "Quomodo  igitur  qui  manifeste 


THE   INQUISITION  65 

Council  of  1215.^  They  are  a  good  indication  of  the 
mind  of  the  time.  We  may  well  ask  whether  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Reims,  the  Count  of  Flanders,  Philip  Augustus, 
Raymond  of  Toulouse,  and  Pedro  of  Aragon,  who  author- 
ized the  use  of  the  stake  for  heretics,  did  not  think  they 
were  following  the  example  of  the  first  Christian  em- 
perors. We  must,  however,  admit  that  there  is  no  direct 
allusion  to  the  early  imperial  legislation  either  in  their 
acts  or  their  writings.  Probably  they  were  more  in- 
fluenced by  the  customs  of  the  time  than  by  the  written 
law. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  Gratian,  who  with  St.  Augustine 
mentioned  only  fine  and  banishment  as  the  penalites  for 
heresy,  was  followed  for  some  time.  We  learn  from 
Benencasa's   Summa   of   the    Decree   that   heretics  were 

in  haeresim  labuntur,  nee  resipiscere  volunt,  puniendi  sunt,  in  superiori  causa 
monstratum  est."  Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  455,  456  and  notes.  This  thesis 
is  proved  at  great  length.  Johannes  Teutonicus  is  more  brief  in  his  commen- 
tary on  ch.  39,  quest.  4,  of  the  Decree:  Vides  ergo  quod  hcereiici  sunt  occi- 
dendi,  prima  tamen  admonendi.  The  anonymous  writer,  whose  commentary 
is  found  in  Huguccio's  Summa  of  the  Decree,  teaches  the  same  doctrine  on 
ch.  39,  causa  23,  quest.  4:  Quando  vult  temporales  mortes,  id  est  paenas.  Vel 
proprie  distinguere  quod  primo  debent  admoneri  et  deinde,  si  pertinaciter 
resistere  voluerint  et  incorrigibiles  extiterint,  poterunt  morte  afl&ci.  He 
quotes  in  favor  of  his  thesis  the  law  Arcani  against  the  Manicheans.  And 
on  ch.  41,  Non  invenitur,  he  adds:  "Innuit  quod  pro  sola  h^resi  non  sint 
morte  puniendi.  Solve  ut  prius.  Quando  enim  sunt  incorrigibiles,  ultimo 
supplicio  feruntur,  aliter  non."  Bibhotheque  Nationale,  Ms.  15379,  fol.  49. 
Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  456,  457  and  notes. 

1  The  collection  of  Anselm  of  Lucca  is  prior  to  1080.     The  Panormia  was 
written  about  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century;  the  Decree  about  1140; 
the  three  commentaries  were  written  a  little  before  1215.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit., 
PP-  453-458- 
6 


66  THE   INQUISITION 

punished  not  by  death,  but  by  banishment  and  con- 
fiscation of  their  property.^ 

V  The  Councils  of  Tours  and  Lateran  also  decreed  confis- 
cation, but  for  banishment  they  substituted  imprisonment, 
a  penalty  unknown  to  the  Roman  law.  The  Council  of 
Lateran  appealed  to  the  authority  of  St.  Leo  the  Great, 
to  compel  Christian  princes  to  prosecute  heresy.^ 

From  the  time  of  Lucius  III,  owing  to  the  influence  of 
the  lawyers,  the  two  penalties  of  banishment  and  con- 
fiscation prevailed.  Innocent  III  extended  them  to  the 
universal  Church.^ 

This   was    undoubtedly    a     severer    penal    legislation 

1  Biblioth.  Nation.,  Ms.  3892,  Siimma  of  Benencasa:  41,  cap.  23,  q.  4, 
Non  invenitur:  Vincentius  qujesivit  ab  Augustino  ubi  inveniatur  exemplum 
quod  ecclesia  petierit  auxilium  a  regibus  terrae  contra  inimicos,  respondit: 
Non  in  Evangelic  nee  in  Apostolo  istud  exemplum  reperitur.  Tamen  unum 
exemplum  Nabuchodonosor  regis,  in  quo  utrumque  tempus  figuratur,  et 
primitivae  Ecclesiae  in  qua  justi  ab  impiis  cogebantur  ad  malum,  et  Ecclesiae 
quae  nunc  est,  in  qua  haeretici  coguntur  a  Christianis,  non  ad  mortem,  sed  ad 
exilium  vel  dampnum  rerum  temporalium. 

2  Canon  27,  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  x,  col.  1522;  Leonis,  Epist.  xv,  ad 
Turribium,  Migne,  Pat.  lat.,  vol.  liv,  col.  679-680. 

3  The  legate  Milo  persuaded  the  consuls  of  Montpellier  to  swear,  August  i, 
1209:  "Ipsos  (haereticos)  persequemur  secundum  legitimas  sanctiones,  et 
eorum  bona  omnia  pro  posse  nostro  infiscabimus,"  etc.  D'Achery,  Spici- 
legium,  1723,  in-fol.,  vol.  i,  pp,  706,  707.  A  little  later,  the  Council  of  Avignon, 
presided  over  by  the  two  legates  of  Innocent  III,  proposed  the  oath  of  t'le 
Consuls  of  Montpellier  as  a  model  for  the  civil  authorities  of  Provence:  "ut 
eos  (haereticos)  puniant  secundum  canonicas  et  legitimas  sanctiones,  nihil- 
ominus  bona  ipsorum  omnia  confiscantes."  D'Acherj',  Spicilegium,  vol.  i, 
p.  704,  col.  I. 

We  have  already  mentioned  the  laws  of  Innocent  (1198)  for  southern 
France,  and  certain  cities  of  Italy  (pp.  58-60).  We  have  another  letter,  January 
5,  1199,  to  the  Bishop  of  Syracuse,  recommending  him:  "excommunicates 


THE   INQUISITION  67 

than  that  of  the  preceding  age.  But  on  the  other 
hand  it  was  an  effective  barrier  against  the  infliction  of 
the  death  penalty,  which  had  become  so  common  in  many 
parts  of  Christendom. 

Besides,  during  this  period,  the  church  used  vigorous 
measures  only  against  obdurate  heretics,  who  were  also 
disturbers  of  the  public  peace. ^  They  alone  were  handed 
over  to  the  secular  arm;  if  they  abjured  their  heresy, 
they  were  at  once  pardoned,  provided  they  freely  ac- 
cepted the  penance   imposed  upon    them.^      This  kind 

(haereticos)  publice  nuntiari  facias  et  bona  eorum  a  principibus  publicari." 
Ep.  i,  509.  On  December  12,  1206,  he  exhorted  the  podesta,  consuls,  and 
Council  of  Faenza:  '^quoslibet  pravitatis  hoereticcs  secta tores  satagatis  a  civitate 
vestra  depellere"  as  Prato  and  Florence  had  done;  Ep.  ix,  204;  cf.  Letter 
of  March  10,  1206,  Ep.  ix,  18:  "A  civitate  vestra  penitus  excludatis  et  sub 
perpetuo  banno  consistant  nee  recipiantur  de  caetero  vel  etiam  tolerentur  in 
civitate  manere  nisi  ad  mandatum  Ecclesias  revertantur,  bona  eorum  .  .  . 
confiscentur  secundum  legitimas  sanctiones  et  etiam  publicentur."  The 
hannum  perpetuum  and  the  legitimce  sanctiones  refer  to  the  old  Teutonic  law 
and  the  Roman  law.  The  Pope  even  wrote  to  Hungary  (Letter  of  October 
II,  1200,  Ep.  iii,  3),  where  his  laws  were  observed  (cf.  Ep.  v,  no,  and  Thomae 
archdeacon!  Hist.  Salonitana  in  Schwandner,  Rerum,  Hungaric.  SS.,  1746, 
vol.  iii,  p.  568).  Finally,  we  have  the  promise  made  to  the  Pope  by  the 
emperor  Otto  IV,  March  22,  1209:  "Super  eradicando  autem  haeretice  pravi- 
tatis errore  auxilium  dabimus  et  operam  efficacem."  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges, 
vol.  ii,  p.  217.  This  promise  was  renewed  in  the  same  terms  by  Frederic  II, 
July  12,  1213,  ibid.,  p.  224. 

1  Innocent  III  merely  condemned  to  prison  in  a  monastery  the  heretical 
abbot  of  Nevers:  "Et  quoniam  metuendum  est  ne  in  laquem  desperationis 
incidens  et  ad  perfidorum  haereticorum  insaniam  ex  toto  conversus  eorum 
praevaricationibus  contaminet  gregem  intactum,  retrudi  eum  in  districto 
monasterio  faciatis  et  ibi  ad  agendam  poenitentiam  sub  arcta  custodia  deti- 
neri."  Letter  of  June  19,  1199,  to  a  cardinal  and  a  Bishop  of  Paris.  Ep.  ii, 
99. 

2  Cf .  Canon  27  of  the  Lateran  Council  (1179),  which  we  have  quoted 


68  THE   INQUISITION 

treatment,  it  was  true,  was  not  to  last.  It,  however, 
deserves  special  notice,  for  the  honor  of  those  who 
preached  and  practiced  it. 

above,  and  which  is  inserted  in  the  Decretals  of  Gregory  ix,  cap.  ix,  De 
hareiicis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii. 


CHAPTER   V 

The  Catharan  or  Albigensian  Heresy  —  Its  Anti- 
Catholic  AND  Anti-Social  Character 

While  Popes  Alexander  HI,  Lucius  HI,  and  Innocent 
III,  were  adopting  such  vigorous  measures,  the  Catharan 
heresy  by  its  rapid  increase  caused  widespread  alarm 
throughout  Christendom.  Let  us  endeavor  to  obtain 
some  insight  into  its  character,  before  we  describe  the 
Inquisition,  which  was  destined  to  destroy  it. 

The  dominant  heresy  of  the  period  was  the  Albigensian 
or  Catharan  heresy;^  it  was  related  toOriental  Manicheism^ 
through  the  Paulicians  and  the  Bogomiles,  who  professed 
a  dualistic  theory  on  the  origin  of  the  world. 

In  the  tenth  century,  the  empress  Theodora,  who 
detested  the  Paulicians,  had  one  hundred  thousand  of 

1  The  heretics  called  themselves  "Cathari,''  or  "the  Pure."  They  wished 
thereby  to  denote  especially  their  horror  of  all  sexual  relations,  says  the 
monk  Egbert:  Sermones  contra  Catharos,  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  cxcv,  col.  13. 
Their  opponents  took  delight  in  ridiculing  this  name.  Cf.  the  anonymous 
author  of  Error es  haereticorum  (of  the  fourteenth  century),  quoted  by  Dol- 
Unger:  "Kathari  dicuntur  a  charto  (cato),  cujus  posteriora  osculantur,  in 
cujus  specie  eis  Lucifer  apparet,"  etc.  Beitrage,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente), 
p.  293. 

2  On  the  origin  of  the  Manichean  heresy,  cf.  Duchesne,  Histoire  ancienne 
de  rEglise,  pp.  555,  556. 

69 


70  THE   INQUISITION 

them  massacred;^  the  emperor,  Alexis  Comnenus  (about 
1 1 18),  persecuted  the  Bogomiles  in  Hke  manner.^  Many, 
therefore,  of  both  sects  went  to  western  Europe,  where 
they  finally  settled,  and  began  to  spread.^ 

As  early  as  1167,  they  held  a  council  at  St.  Felix  de 
Caraman,  near  Toulouse,  under  the  presidency  of  one 
of  their  leaders.  Pope  or  perhaps  only  Bishop  Niketas 
(Niquinta)  of  Constantinople.  Other  bishops  of  the  sect 
were  present:  Mark,  who  had  charge  of  all  the  churches 
of  Lombardy,  Tuscany,  and  the  Marches  of  Treviso; 
Robert  de  Sperone,  who  governed  a  church  in  the  north, 
and  Sicard  Cellerier,  Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Albi.  They 
appointed  Bernard  Raymond,  Bishop  of  Toulouse,  Gui- 
raud  Mercier,  Bishop  of  Carcassonne,  and  Raymond  of 
Casalis,  Bishop  of  Val  d'Aran,  in  the  diocese  of  Com- 
minges.'*  Such  an  organization  certainly  indicates  the 
extraordinary  development  of  the  heresy  about  the 
middle  of  the  twelfth  century.^ 
About  the  year  1200  its  progress  was  still  more  alarm- 

1  On  the  Paulicians,  and  this  massacre,  cf.    DoUingcr,  Bciirdge,  vol.    i, 

PP-  1-34-  ,       T.-    • 

2  On  the  Bogomiles  (The  Friends  of  God)  cf.  Vernet,  in  the  Dictionncne 

de  Theologie  Caiholique,  Paris,  Letouzey  et  Ane,  vol.  ii,  col.  927-930. 

3  On  their  route,  cf.  DoUinger,  ibid.,  pp.  51-75.  Vernet,  ibid.,  vol.  ii, 
col.  1998  and  seq. 

4  Hist,  des  Gaules,  vol.  xiv,  pp.  448,  449. 

8  In  1 1 78,  the  legate  Peter  of  St.  Chrysogono  was  opposed  by  the  Catharan 
Bishops  of  Toulouse  and  Val.  d'Aran.  At  Toulouse  he  held  a  public  con- 
ference with  them,  after  giving  them  a  safe-conduct.  Vaissette,  Histoire  du 
Languedoc,  vol.  xi,  p.  82. 


THE   INQUISITION  71 

ing.  Bonacursus,  a  Catharan  bishop  converted  to  Cathol- 
icism, writes  about  11 90:  "Behold  the  cities,  towns  and 
homes  filled  with  these  false  prophets."  ^  Caesarius,  of 
Heisterbach,  tells  us  that  a  few  years  later  there  were 
Cathari  in  about  one  thousand  cities,^  especially  in  Lom- 
bardy  and  Languedoc. 

There  were  at  least  seven  to  eight  hundred  of  "the 
Perfected"  in  Languedoc  alone;  and  to  obtain  approxi- 
mately the  total  number  of  the  sect,  we  must  multiply 
this  number  by  twenty  or  even  more.^ 

Of  course,  perfect  unity  did  not  exist  among  the  Cathari. 
The  different  names  by  which  they  were  known  clearly 
indicate  certain  differences  of  doctrine  among  them. 
Some,  like  the  Cathari  of  Alba  and  Desenzano,*  taught 
with  the  Paulicians  an  absolute  dualism,  affirming  that 
all  things  created  came  from  two  principles,  the  one 
essentially  good,  and  the  other  essentially  bad.  Two 
other  groups,  the  Concorrezenses  and  the  Bagolenses,^ 
like  the  ancient  Gnostics  held  a  modified  form  of  dual- 
ism; they  pretended  that  the  evil  spirit  had  so  marred 
the  Creator's  work,  that  matter  had  become  the  instru- 
ment of  evil  in  the  world.     Still  they  agreed  with  the 

^  Manifestatio  hcsresis  Catharorum,  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cciv,  col.  778. 

^  Dialogi,  Antwerp,  1604,  p.  289. 

3  This  is  DoUinger's  estimate,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,  pp.  212,  213. 

*  Alba  was  a  city  of  Piedmont;  Desenzano  was  a  small  city  southwest  of 
Lac  de  Garde,  where  the  Cathari  were  numerous. 

5  Concorezzo  was  a  district  of  Lombardy,  Bagnolo  was  the  name  of  many 
cities  in  Italy;  cf.  Vernet,  op.  cii.,  col.  1993,  1994. 


72  THE   INQUISITION 

pronounced  dualists  in  nearly  all  their  doctrines  and  ob- 
servances; their  few  theoretical  differences  were  scarcely 
appreciable  in  practice.^ 

Still  contemporary  writers  called  them  by  different 
names.  In  Italy  they  were  confounded  with  the  orthodox 
Patarins  and  Arnaldists  of  Milan;  which  explains  the 
frequent  use  of  the  word  Patareni  in  the  constitutions  of 
Frederic  II,  and  other  documents. 

The  Arnaldists  or  Arnoldists  and  the  Speronistae,  were 
the  disciples  of  Arnold  of  Brescia,  and  the  heretical 
bishop  Sperone.  Although  the  chief  center  of  the 
Cathari  in  France  was  Toulouse  and  not  Albi,  they  were 
called  Alhigeois  (Albigenses),  and  Tisserands  (Texe rants), 
because  many  were  weavers  by  trade;  Avians,  because  of 
their  denial  of  Christ's  divinity:  Paulicians,  which  was 
corrupted  into  Poplicani,  Puhlicani,  Piphes  and  Piples 
(Flanders);  Bulgarians  {Bulgari) ,  horn  their  origin,  which 
became  in  the  mouths  of  the  people  of  Bugari,  Bulgri, 
and  Bugres?  In  fact  about  1200,  nearly  all  the  heretics 
of  western  Europe  were  considered  Cathari.^ 

1  On  the  Catharan  doctrines,  cf.  HoWingcr,  Beitrdge,vo\.  \,  pp.  132-200; 
vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  52,  85,  273,  279,  293,  297,  301,  311,  321,  324,  326, 
374,  612,  617,  620;  Vernet,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  col.  1993  and  seq. 

2  For  the  different  names,  cf.  DoUinger,  Beitrage,  vol.  i,  pp.  127-132, 
Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  114,  note.     Bougre  later  on  designated  any  heretic. 

3  The  Waldenses  differed  considerably  from  the  Cathari,  although  in  some 
things  they  agreed.  For  their  teachings,  cf.  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii 
{Dokumente),  pp.  92,  251,  304,  328,  331,  344,  346,  351,  365,  367.  In  many 
documents  (cf.  the  Processus  Inquisitionis,  Appendix  A)  they  were  mistaken 
one  for  the  other. 


THE   INQUISITION  73 

Catharism  was  chiefly  a  negative  heresy;  it  denied  the 
doctrines,  hierarchy  and  worship  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
as  well  as  the  essential  rights  of  the  State. 

These  neo-Manicheans  denied  that  the  Roman  Church 
represented  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  Popes  were  not 
the  successors  of  St.  Peter,  but  rather  the  successors  of 
Constantine.^  St.  Peter  never  came  to  Rome.  The 
relics  which  were  venerated  in  the  Constantinian  basil- 
ica, were  the  bones  of  some  one  who  died  in  the  third 
century;  they  were  not  relics  of  the  Prince  of  the 
Apostles.^  Constantine  unfortunately  sanctioned  this 
fraud,  by  conferring  upon  the  Roman  pontiff  an  immense 
domain,  together  with  the  prestige  that  accompanies 
temporal  authority.^  How  could  anyone  recognize  under 
the  insignia,  the  purple  mantle,  and  the  crown  of  the 
successors  of  St.  Sylvester,  a  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ? 
Christ  had  no  place  where  to  lay  his  head,  whereas  the 
Popes  lived  in  a  palace !  Christ  rebuked  worldly  dominion, 
while  the  Popes  claimed  it !  What  had  the  Roman  curia 
with  its  thirst  for  riches  and  honors  in  common  with  the 
gospel  of  Christ?    What  were  these  archbishops,  primates, 

J  Moneta  (a  Dominican  Inquisitor  about  1250),  Adversus  Calharos  et 
Valdenses,  ed.  Ricchini,  1743,  p.  409.  St.  Dominic  died  in  Moneta's  bed  at 
Bologna,  Aug.  6,  1231.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  42. 

2  Moneta,  ibid.,  p.  410. 

3  The  Middle  Ages  believed  firmly  in  the  donation  of  Constantine.  It 
was,  however,  questioned  by  Wetzel,  a  disciple  of  Arnold  of  Brescia  in  1152, 
in  a  letter  to  Frederic  Barbarossa,  Martene  and  Durand,  Veterum  scriptorum 
.  .  .  amplissima  collectio,  Paris,  1724,  vol.  ii,  col.  554-557. 


y4  THE   INQUISITION 

cardinals,  archdeacons,  monks,  canons,  Dominicans,  and 
Friars  Minor  but  the  Pharisees  of  old !  The  priests  placed 
heavy  burdens  upon  the  faithful  people,  and  they  them- 
selves did  not  touch  them  with  the  tips  of  their  fingers; 
they  received  tithes  from  the  fields  and  flocks;  they  ran 
after  the  heritage  of  widows;  all  practices  which  Christ 
condemned  in  the  Pharisees.^ 

And  yet  withal  they  dared  persecute  humble  souls  who, 
by  their  pure  life,  tried  to  realize  the  perfect  ideal  proposed 
by  Christ!  These  persecutors  were  not  the  true  dis- 
ciples of  Jesus.  The  Roman  Church  was  the  woman  of 
the  Apocalypse,^  drunk  with  the  blood  of  the  Saints,  and 
the  Pope  was  Antichrist.^ 

The  sacraments  of  the  Church  were  a  mere  figment  of 
the  imagination.  The  Cathari  made  one  sacrament  out 
of  Baptism,  Confirmation,  Penance  and  Eucharist,  which 
they  called  the  Consolamentum;  they  denied  the  real 
presence  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  and  they  re- 
pudiated marriage."* 

Baptism  of  water  was  to  them  an  empty  ceremony,^ 

as  valueless  as  the  baptism  of  John.  Christ  had  un- 
doubtedly said:  "Unless  a  man  be  born  again  of  water 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  Kingdom 

1  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  pp.  390-396. 

2Apoc.  vii,  3,  18. 

3  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  397. 

^  Cf.  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokuntente),  pp.  294,  297. 

^DoUinger   ibid.,  pp.  5,  29,  68,  155,  197,  297. 


THE   INQUISITION  75 

of  God."  ^  But  the  acts  of  the  Apostles  proved  that  bap- 
tism was  a  mere  ceremony,  for  they  declared  that  the 
Samaritans,  although  baptized,  had  not  thereby  received 
the  Holy  Spirit,  by  whom  alone  the  soul  is  purified  from 
sin.^ 

The  Catholic  Church  also  erred  greatly  in  teaching 
infant  baptism.  As  their  faculties  were  undeveloped, 
infants  could  not  receive  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  Cathari  — 
at  least  till  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century  —  did 
not  confer  the  Consolamentum  upon  newly  born  infants. 
According  to  them,  the  Church  could  only  abandon  these 
little  ones  to  their  unhappy  destiny.^  If  they  died,  they 
were  either  forever  lost,  or,  as  others  taught,  condemned 
to  undergo  successive  incarnations,  until  they  received  the 
Consolamentum,  "^hich.  classed  them  with  "the  Perfected." 

It  was  preposterous  to  imagine  that  Christ  wished  to 
change  bread  and  wine  into  his  body  in  the  Eucharist. 
The  Cathari  considered  transubstantiation  as  the  worst 
of  abominations,  since  matter,  in  every  form,  was  the 
work  of  the  Evil  Spirit.  They  interpreted  the  gospel 
texts  in  a  figurative  sense:  "This  is  My  Body,"  they  said, 
simply  means:  "This  represents  My  Body,"  thus  antici- 
pating the  teaching  of  Carlstadt  and  Zwingli."    They  all 

1  John  iii.  5. 

2  Act  i.  5;  viii.  14-17     Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  290. 

3Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  394-  DoUinger,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  193;  vol.  ii  (Doku- 
mente),  pp.  217,  240,  246. 

4  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  295;  Alanus,  Adversus  hccreticos  et  Waldenses,  ed. 


^6  THE   INQUISITION 

agreed  in  denouncing  Catholics  for  daring  to  claim  that 
they  really  partook  of  the  Body  of  Christ,  as  if  Christ 
could  enter  a  man's  stomach,  to  say  nothing  worse;*  or 
as  if  Christ  would  expose  himself  to  be  devoured  by  rats 
and  mice.2 

The  Cathari,  denying  the  real  presence  of  Jesus  Christ 
in  the  Eucharist,  rejected  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass. 
God,  according  to  them,  repudiated  all  sacrifices.  Did 
he  not  teach  us  through  his  prophet  Osee:  "I  desire 
mercy  and  not  sacrifice."  ^ 

The  Lord's  supper  which  the  apostles  ate  so  often  was 
something  altogether  different  from  the  Roman  Mass. 
They  knew  nothing  of  sacerdotal  vestments,  stone  altars 
with  shining  candelabra,  incense,  hymns,  and  chantings. 
They  did  not  worship  in  an  immense  building  called  a 
church  —  a  word  which  should  be  applied  exclusively  to 
the  assembly  of  the  saints."* 

The  Cathari,  in  their  hatred  of  Catholic  piety,  railed  in 
the  most  abusive  language  against  the  veneration  of  im- 
ages, and  especially  of  the  cross.    The  images  and  statues 

Masson,  p.  142;  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  23,  156,  198, 
322. 

1  "Quod  mittitur  in  latrinam  ventris  et  per  turpissimum  locum,  quae  non 
possent  fieri,  si  esset  ibi  Deus."     Dollinger,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  p.  5. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  27.  Cf.  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  300;  Gregory  of  Florence,  Bishop 
of  Fano,  about  1240,  Disputatio  inter  Catholicum  et  Paterinum,  in  Martene 
and  Durand,  Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum,  vol.  v,  p.  1729. 

3  Osee,  vi,  6;  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  300.  Disputatio  inter  Catholicum  et 
Paterinum,  p.  1730. 

4  Cf.  Dollinger,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii  {Dokumente),  pp.  23,  40,  56,  156,  377. 


THE   INQUISITION  77 

of  the  saints  were  to  them  nothing  but  idols,*  which  ought 
to  be  destroyed.  The  cross  on  which  Jesus  died  should  be 
hated  rather  than  reverenced.  Some  of  them,  moreover, 
denied  that  Jesus  had  been  really  crucified;  they  held  that 
a  demon  died,  or  feigned  to  die  in  his  stead.^  Even  those 
who  believed  in  the  reality  of  the  Savior's  crucifixion 
made  this  very  belief  a  reason  for  condemning  the  ven- 
eration of  the  cross.  What  man  is  there,  they  said,  who 
could  see  a  loved  one,  for  example  a  father,  die  upon  a 
cross,  and  not  feel  ever  after  a  deep  hatred  of  this  in- 
strument of  torture?^  The  cross,  therefore,  should  not 
be  reverenced,  but  despised,  insulted  and  spat  upon."* 
One  of  them  even  said:  "  I  would  gladly  hew  the  cross  to 
pieces  with  an  axe,  and  throw  it  into  the  fire  to  make 
the  pot  boil."  ^ 

Not  only  were  the  Cathari  hostile  to  the  Church  and 
her  divine  worship,  but  they  were  also  in  open  revolt 
against  the  State,  and  its  rights. 

The  feudal  society  rested  entirely  upon  the  oath  of 
fealty  (jusjurandum),  which  was  the  bond  of  its  strength 
and  solidity. 

According  to  the  Cathari,  Christ  taught  that  it  was 

1  Dollinger,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  26,  56,  176,  323. 

2  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  461;  Dispuiatio  inter  Catholicum  et  Paterinum, 
p.  1748. 

3  Dollinger,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  6,  29,  73,  223. 

*  "Immo  homo  debebat  spuere  contra  earn  et  facere  omnem  vilitatem,"  etc. 
Dollinger,  ibid.,  pp.  26;  cf.  p.  21. 
5  Dollinger,  ibid.,  pp.  168,  i6g. 


yS  THE   INQUISITION 

sinful  to  take  an  oath,  and  that  the  speech  of  every  Chris- 
tian should  be  yes,  yes;  no,  no.  '  Nothing,  therefore, 
could  induce  them  to  take  an  oath.^ 

The  authority  of  the  State,  even  when  Christian,  ap- 
peared to  them,  in  certain  respects,  very  doubtful.  Had 
not  Christ  questioned  Peter,  saying:  "What  is  thy 
opinion,  Simon?  The  kings  of  the  earth,  of  whom  do 
they  receive  tribute  or  custom?  of  their  own  children, 
or  of  strangers?"  Peter  replied:  "Of  strangers."  Jesus 
said  to  him:  "Then  are  the  children  free  (of  every  obli- 
gation)." ^ 

The  Cathari  quoted  these  words  to  justify  their  refusal 
of  allegiance  to  princes.  Were  they  not  disciples  of  Christ, 
whom  the  truth  had  made  free?  ^  Some  of  them  not  only 
disputed  the  lawfulness  of  taxation,  but  went  so  far  as  to 
condone  stealing,  provided  the  thief  had  done  no  injury 
to  "Believers."  ^ 


1  Matt.  V,  37;  James  v,  12. 

2  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  15,  83,  167,  323;  Moneta, 
op.  cit.,  p.  470;  Doat,  xxi),  p.  90;  Bernard  Gui,  Practica  inquisitionis,  p.  239. 

3  Matt.  xvii.  24,  25. 

4  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  69,  75;  cf.  vol.  i,  p.  183. 

5  Contrary  to  the  Catholic  teaching,  the  Cathari  absolved  those  who  stole 
from  "non-believers,"  without  obliging  them  to  make  restitution.  "Audivit 
ab  Jacobo  Auterii  et  ab  aliis  quod  credentes  propter  hoc  erant  audaces  ad 
faciendum  malum  aliis  hominibus  et  ad  inferendum  damnum  eis,  quia  con- 
fidebant,  quod  in  morte  reciperentur  et  sic  absolverentur  per  eas  ab  omnibus 
peccatis  et  salvarentur,  et  non  audivit  ab  haereticis,  nee  credentibus,  quod 
haeretici  inducerent  aliquem  credentem  quem  haereticare  volebant  quod 
restitueret  alicui  ilia  quae  male  abstulerat  vel  lucratus  fuerat  ab  eo;  credit 
tamen,  quod  haeretici  inducerent  credentes,  quod  si  aliquid  injuste  habuerant 


THE   INQUISITION  79 

Some  of  the  Cathari  admitted  the  authority  of  the 
State,  but  denied  its  right  to  inflict  capital  punishment. 
"It  is  not  God's  will,"  said  Pierre  Garsias,  "that  human 
justice  condemn  any  one  to  death;  ^  and  when  one  of  the 
Cathari  became  consul  of  Toulouse,  he  wrote  to  remind 
him  of  this  absolute  law.^  But  the  Summa  contra  hceret- 
icos  asserts:  "all  the  Catharan  sects  taught  that  the 
public  prosecution  of  crime  was  unjust,  and  that  no 
man  had  a  right  to  administer  justice";^  a  teaching 
which  denied  the  State's  right  to  punish. 

The  Cathari  interpreted  literally  the  words  of  Christ  to 
Peter:  "All  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the 
sword,"  ^  and  applied  the  commandment  Non  occides 
absolutely.  "In  no  instance,"  they  said,  "has  one  the 
right  to  kill  another";^  neither  the  internal  welfare  of 
a  country,  nor  its  external  interests  can  justify  murder. 
War  is  never  lawful.  The  soldier  defending  his  country 
is  just  as  much  a  murderer  as  the  most  common  criminal. 

ab  aliis  credentibus,  quod  illud  redderent,  sed  (non)  credit,  quod  inducerent 
eos  ad  reddendum  quod  in  juste  habuerant  a  non  credentibus  Tamen  hoc 
communiter  hasretici  tenebant,  quod  sive  earum  credentes  redderent  illud 
quod  male  acquisiverant  sive  non,  solummodo  quod  reciperentur  per  hasreti- 
cos,  quod  absoluti  essent  ab  omnibus  peccatis  et  salvarentur. "  Dollinger, 
ibid.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  248,  249;  cf.  pp.  245,   246. 

1  Doat,  vol.  xxii,  p.  89. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  100. 

3  "  Quod  vindicta  non  debet  fieri ;  quod  j ustitia  non  debet  fieri  per  hominem." 
Summa  contra  hasreticos,  ed.  Douais,  p.  133,  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  513. 

4  Matt.  xxvi.  52. 

^"Nullo  casu  occidendum."  Doat,  xxiii,  100;  Summa  contra  hareticos^ 
p.  133.     Cf.  Dollinger,  Beitfage,  vol.  ii,  p.  199. 


8o  THE   INQUISITION 

It  was  not  any  special  aversion  to  the  crusades,  but  their 
horror  of  war  in  general,  that  made  the  Cathari  declare 
the  preachers  of  the  crusades  murderers.^ 

These  anti-Catholic,  anti-patriotic,  and  anti-social 
theories  were  only  the  negative  side  of  Catharism. 
Let  us  now  ascertain  what  they  substituted  for  the 
Catholic  doctrines  they  denied. 

Catharism,  as  we  have  already  hinted,  was  a  hodge- 
podge of  pagan  dualism  and  gospel  teaching,  given  to  the 
world  as  a  sort  of  reformed  Christianity. 

Human  souls,  spirits  fallen  from  heaven  into  a  material 
body  which  is  the  work  of  the  Evil  Spirit,  were  subject 
on  this  earth  to  a  probation,  which  was  ended  by  Christ, 
or  rather  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  were  set  free  by  the 
imposition  of  hands,  the  secret  of  which  had  been  com- 
mitted to  the  true  Church  by  the  disciples  of  Jesus. 

This  Church  had  its  rulers,  the  Bishops,  and  its  mem- 
bers who  are  called  "the  Perfected,"  "the  Consoled," 
and  "the  Believers." 

We  need  not  dwell  upon  the  episcopate  of  the  Catharan 
hierarchy.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  the  Bishop  was  always 
surrounded  by  three  dignitaries,  the  Filius  Major,  the 
Filius  Minor,  and  the  Deacon.  The  Bishop  had  charge 
of  the  most  important  religious  ceremonies;  the  impo- 
sition of  hands  for  the  initiation  or  Consolamentum,  the 
breaking  of  bread  which   replaced   the    Eucharist,   and 

^  Doat,  xxii,  89;  Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii,  pp.  199,  200,  287. 


THE   INQUISITION  8i 

the  liturgical  prayers  such  as  the  recitation  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer.  When  he  was  absent,  the  Filius  Major,  the 
Filius  Minor,  or  the  Deacon  took  his  place.  It  was  sel- 
dom, however,  that  these  dignitaries  traveled  alone;  the 
Bishop  was  always  accompanied  by  his  Deacon,  who 
served  as  his  socius} 

One  joined  the  Church  by  promising  (the  Convenen^a) 
to  renounce  the  Catholic  faith,  and  to  receive  the  Cath- 
aran  initiation  (the  Consolamentum) ,  at  least  at  the  hour 
of  death.2  This  was  the  first  step  on  the  road  to  per- 
fection. Those  who  agreed  to  make  it  were  called  "the 
Believers."  Their  obligations  were  few.  They  were  not 
bound  to  observe  the  severe  Catharan  fasts,  which  we  will 
mention  later  on.  They  could  live  in  the  world  like 
other  mortals,  and  were  even  allowed  to  eat  meat  and 
to  marry.  Their  chief  duty  was  ''to  venerate"  "the 
Perfected,"  each  time  they  entered  their  presence.  They 
genuflected,  and  prostrated  themselves  three  times, 
saying  each  time  as  they  rose  "Give  us  your  bless- 
ing"; the  third  time  they  added:  "Good  Christians,  give 
us  God's  blessing  and  yours;  pray  God  that  he  preserve 

^Ci.'Db\\mger,Beitrage,\o\.  i,  pp.  200-203;  vo\.ii{Dokumente),^^.  194, 
266,  278,  292,  295,  324,  etc. 

2  "Fecit  pactum  h^reticis,  quod  ipsi  vocant  la  convenensa,  quod  peteret 
hcereticos  in  infirmitate  sua,  ut  reciperent  cum  et  servarent  animam  ipsius." 
Sententice  inquisitionis  Tolosance,  in  Limborch,  p.  29.  " Interrogatus  si  fecit 
haereticis  conventionem,  quod  possent  eum  haereticare  et  recipere  in  fidem  et 
sectam  suam  in  fine,  dixit  quod  sic."  Bollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  {Doku- 
mente),  p.  18. 
7 


82  THE   INQUISITION 

us  from  an  evil  death,  and  bring  us  to  a  good  end!"  The 
Perfected  replied:  "Receive  God's  blessing  and  ours; 
may  God  bless  you,  preserve  you  from  an  evil  death,  and 
bring  you  to  a  good  end."  ^  If  these  heretics  were  asked 
why  they  made  others  venerate  them  in  this  manner, 
they  replied  that  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  within  them 
gave  them  the  right  to  such  homage.^  The  Believers 
were  always  required  to  pay  this  extraordinary  mark  of 
respect.  In  fact  it  was  a  sine  qua  non  of  their  being 
admitted  to  the  Convenen^a.^ 

The  Convenen^a  was  not  merely  an  external  bond, 
uniting  "the  Believers"  and  "the  Perfected,"  but  it  was 
also  an  earnest  of  eternal  salvation.  It  assured  the 
future  destiny  of  "the  Believers";  it  gave  them  the  right 
to  receive  the  consolamentum  on  their  death-bed.*  This 
remitted  all  the  sins  of  their  life.  Only  one  thing  could 
deprive  them  of  "this  good  end";  viz.,  the  absence  of  one 
of  the  Perfected,  who  alone  could  lay  hands  upon  them."^ 

1  DoUinger,  ihid.,  p.  4;  cf.  pp.  18,  19,  25,  30,  39;  vol.  i,  pp.  237,  238. 

2  Bollinger,  vol.  ii,  pp.  4,  376. 

3  Boat,  vol.  xxxii,  fol.  170;  cf.  Bollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii,  pp.  27,  145, 
182,  183,  187,  236,  249. 

4  "Paciscens  cum  eis,  ut  si  in  articulo  mortis  esses,  licet  non  haberes  usum 
linguae  nihilominus  te  in  suam  sectam  reciperent."  Boat,  Acta  inquisitionis 
Carcass.,  vol.  i,  fol.  317;  cf.  Bollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,  p.  213;  vol.  ii,  pp.  4, 
236. 

^Ordinarily,  "mos  hgereticorum  existit,  quod,  ubi  duo  perfecti  hceretici  ad 
hjereticandum  aliquem  infirmum  conveniunt,  alter  eorum  solus  et  communiter 
antiquior  in  hseresi  infirmum  hasreticet."  Bollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii,  p.  39. 
But  in  times  of  persecution  only  one  of  "the  Perfected"  was  required  to 
confer  the  consolamentum. 


THE   INQUISITION  83 

Those  who  died  without  the  Catharan  consolamenium 
were  either  eternally  lost,  or  condemned  to  begin  life 
anew  with  another  chance  of  becoming  one  of  "the  good 
men."  ^  These  transmigrations  of  the  soul  were  rather 
numerous.  The  human  soul  did  not  always  pass  directly 
from  the  body  of  a  man  into  the  body  of  another  man. 
It  occasionally  entered  into  the  bodies  of  animals,  •  like 
the  ox  and  the  ass.  The  Cathari  were  wont  to  tell  the 
story  of  "a  good  Christian,"  one  of  "the  Perfected,"  who 
remembered,  in  a  previous  existence  as  a  horse,  having 
lost  his  shoe  in  a  certain  place  between  two  stones,  as  he 
was  running  .swiftly  under  his  master's  spur.  When  he 
became  a  man  he  was  curious  enough  to  hunt  for  it,  and 
he  found  it  in  the  self-same  spot.^  Such  humiliating 
transmigrations  were  undoubtedly  rather  rare.  A  woman 
named  Sybil,  "a  Believer"  and  later  on  one  of  "the 
Perfected,"  remembered  having  been  a  queen  in  a  prior 
existence.^ 

What  the  Convenen^a  promised,  the  Catharan  initiation 
or  consolamenium  gave;^  the  first  made  "Believers,"  and 

1  The  Cathari  commonly  taught  that  there  was  no  hell:  quod  infernus 
nihil  est  ...  ;  quod  animcR  non  damnabuntur.  Cf.  Summa  adversus  Catha- 
ros,  ed.  Douais,  132;  cf.  p.  127.  "De  corpore  in  corpus,  donee  veniret  in 
manus  bonorum  hominum."     Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii,  pp.  36,  174,  175. 

2  DoUinger,  ihid.,  pp.  153,  175. 

3  Dollinger,  ibid.,  p.  24;  cf.  pp.  31,  36,  153,  174,  191,  207,  216,  235. 

■*  The  rites  of  the  Consolamentum  are  indicated  in  a  ritual  published  by 
Cledat  under  the  title:  Le  nouveau  Testament  traduit  au  XIII^  siecle  en 
langue  provengale,  suivi  d'un  rituel  cathare,  Paris,  1888;  and  in  the  Practica 
inquisitionis  hceretice  pravitatis  of  Bernard  Gui,  ed.  Douais,  Paris,  1886. 


84  THE   INQUISITION 

predisposed  souls  to  sanctity;  the  second  made  "the  Per- 
fected," and  conferred  sanctity  with  all  its  rights  and 
prerogatives. 

The  Consolamentum  required  a  preparation  which  we 
may  rightly  compare  with  the  catechumenate  of  the 
early  Christians.^ 

This  probation  usually  lasted  one  year.  It  consisted 
in  an  honest  attempt  to  lead  the  life  of  "the  Perfected," 
and  chiefly  in  keeping  their  three  "lents,"  abstaining 
from  meat,  milk-food  and  eggs.  It  was  therefore  called 
the  time  of  abstinence  {abstinentia).  One  of  ''the  Per- 
fected" was  appointed  by  the  Church  to  report  upon  the 
life  of  the  postulant,  who  daily  had  to  venerate  his  su- 
perior, according  to  the  Catharan  rite.^ 

After  this  probation,  came  the  ceremony  of  "the  de- 
livery" (traditio)  of  the  Lord's  Prayer.  A  number  of 
"the  Perfected"  were  always  present.  The  highest 
dignitary,  the  Bishop  or  "the  Ancient,"  made  the 
candidate  a  lengthy  speech,  which  has  come  down 
to  us: 

"Understand,"  he  said,  "that  when  you  appear  before 
the  Church  of  God  you  are  in  the  presence  of  the  Father, 

1  Cf.  Jean  Guiraud,  Le  Consolamentum  ou  initiation  catJmre,  in  Questions 
d'histoire  et  d\ircheologie  chretienne.     Paris,  1906,  pp.  95-149. 

2  See  the  case  of  Guillaume  Tardieu  in  Doat,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  201  and  seq. 
Another  case  may  be  found  in  Ms.  609  (fol.  41)  of  the  library  of  Toulouse: 
"Sed  dicti  heretici  noluerunt  earn  ipsam  hereticare  donee  bene  esset  instructs 
fidem  et  mores  hereticorum  et  fecisset  primo  tres  quadragenas"  (the  three 
Catharan  lents). 


THE    INQUISITION  85 

the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  Scriptures  prove/'  etc. 
Then,  having  repeated  the  Lord's  Prayer  to  "the  Believer  " 
word  for  word,  and  having  explained  its  meaning,  he  con- 
tinued: "We  deliver  to  you  this  holy  prayer,  that  you 
may  receive  it  from  us,  from  God,  and  from  the  Church, 
that  you  may  have  the  right  to  say  it  all  your  life, 
day  and  night,  alone  and  in  company,  and  that  you  may 
never  eat  or  drink  without  first  saying  it.  If  you  omit 
it,  you  must  do  penance."  The  Believer  replied:  "I  re- 
ceive it  from  you  and  from  the  Church."  ^ 

After  these  words  came  the  Ahrenuntiatio.  At  the 
Catholic  baptism,  the  catechumen  renounced  Satan,  with 
his  works  and  pomps.  According  to  the  Catharan  ritual, 
the  Catholic  Church  was  Satan. 

"The  Perfected '^  said  to  the  Believer:  "Friend,  if  you 
wish  to  be  one  of  us,  you  must  renounce  all  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Church  of  Rome;"  and  he  replied:  "I 
do  renounce  them." 

—  Do  you  renounce  that  cross  made  with  chrism  upon 
your  breast,  head,  and  shoulders? 

—  I  do  renounce  it. 

—  Do  you  believe  that  the  water  of  Baptism  is  effi- 
cacious for  salvation? 

—  No,  I  do  not  believe  it. 

—  Do  you  renounce  the  veil,  which  the  priest  placed 
upon  your  head,  after  you  were  baptized? 

1  Cledat,  Rituel  Caihare,  pp.  xi-xv. 


86  THE   INQUISITION 

—  I  do  renounce  it.^ 

Again  the  Bishop  addressed  "the  Believer"  to  impress 
upon  him  the  new  duties  involved  in  his  receiving  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Those  who  were  present  prayed  God  to 
pardon  the  candidate's  sins,  and  then  venerated  "the 
Perfected"  (the  ceremony  of  the  Parcia).  After  the 
Bishop's  prayer,  "May  God  bless  thee,  make  thee  a  good 
Christian,  and  grant  thee  a  good  end,"  the  candidate 
made  a  solemn  promise  faithfully  to  fulfill  the  duties  he 
had  learned  during  his  prohatio?  The  words  of  his 
promise  are  to  be  found  in  Sacconi:  "I  promise  to  de- 
vote my  life  to  God  and  to  the  gospel,  never  to  lie  or  swear, 
never  to  touch  a  woman,  never  to  kill  an  animal,  never  to 
eat  meat,  eggs  or  milk-food;  never  to  eat  anything  but 
fish  and  vegetables,  never  to  do  anything  without  first 
saying  the  Lord's  Prayer,  never  to  eat,  travel,  or  pass  the 
night  without  a  socius.  If  I  fall  into  the  hands  of  my 
enemies  or  happen  to  be  separated  from  my  socius,  I 
promise  to  spend  three  days  without  food  or  drink.  I  will 
never  take  off  my  clothes  on  retiring,  nor  will  I  deny  my 
faith  even  when  threatened  with  death."  ^  The  cere- 
mony of  the  Parcia  was  then  repeated. 

Then,  according  to  the  ritual,  "the  Bishop  takes  the 
book  (the  New  Testament),  and  places  it  upon  the  head 

1  Sacconi,  Summa  de  CatJtaris,  in  Martene  and  Durand,  Thesaurus  novus 
anecdotorum,  vol.  v,  p.  1776. 

2  Cledat,  Rituel  Cathare,  pp.  xvi  and  xx. 

3  Sacconi,  op.  cit. 


THE   INQUISITION  87 

of  the  candidate,  while  the  other  "good  men"  present  im- 
pose hands  upon  him,  saying:  "Holy  Father,  accept  this 
servant  of  yours  in  all  righteousness,  and  send  your  grace 
and  your  Spirit  upon  him."  ^  The  Holy  Spirit  was  then 
supposed  to  descend,  and  the  ceremony  of  the  Conso- 
lamentum  was  finished;  "the  Believer"  had  become  one 
of  "the  Perfected." 

However,  before  the  assembly  dispersed,  "the  Per- 
fected" proceeded  to  carry  out  two  other  ceremonies: 
the  vesting  and  the  kiss  of  peace. 

"While  their  worship  was  tolerated,"  writes  an  his- 
torian,^ "they  gave  their  new  brother  a  black  garment; 
but  in  times  of  persecution  they  did  not  wear  it,  for  fear 
of  betraying  themselves  to  the  officials  of  the  Inquisition. 
In  the  thirteenth  century,  in  southern  France,  they  were 
known  by  the  linen  or  flaxen  belt,  which  the  men  wore 
over  their  shirts,  and  the  women  wore  cordulam  cindam  ad 
carnem  nudum  subtus  mamillas.^  They  resembled  the 
cord  or  scapular  that  the  Catholic  tertiaries  wore  to  repre- 
sent the  habit  of  the  monastic  order  to  which  they  belonged. 
They  were  therefore  called  '  haeretici  vestiti/  ^  which  be- 
came a  common  term  for  "the  Perfected." 

*  Rituel  cathare,  pp.  xx  and  xxv. 

2  Jean  Guiraud,  Le  consolamentum  ou  initiation  cathare,  loc.  cit.,  p.  134. 

3  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  p.  36. 

4  "Haeretici  perfecti  vulgariter  vestiti  dicti."  Council  of  Beziers  in  1299, 
in  Martene  and  Durand,  Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum,  vol.  iv,  p.  225.  Cf. 
DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,   p.  205;  vol.   ii  (Dokumente),   pp.    178,  179,  194, 

195- 


88  THE   INQUISITION 

''The  last  ceremony  was  the  kiss  of  peace,  which  'the 
Perfected'  gave  their  new  brother,  by  kissing  him  twice 
(on  the  mouth),  bis  in  ore  ex  transverso.  He  in  turn 
kissed  the  one  nearest  him,  who  passed  on  the  pax  to  all 
present.  If  the  recipient  was  a  woman,  the  minister 
gave  her  the  pax  by  touching  her  shoulder  with  the  book 
of  the  gospels,  and  his  elbow  with  hers.  She  transmitted 
this  symbolic  kiss  in  the  same  manner  to  the  one  next 
to  her,  if  he  was  a  man.  After  a  last  fraternal  embrace, 
they  all  congratulated  the  new  brother,  and  the  assembly 
dispersed."^ 

The  promises  made  by  this  new  member  of  "the 
Perfected"  were  not  all  equally  hard  to  keep.  As  far 
as  positive  duties  were  concerned,  there  were  but  three: 
the  daily  recitation  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  breaking  of 
bread,  and  the  apparellamentum. 

Only  "the  Perfected"  were  allowed  to  recite  the  Lord's 
Prayer.2  The  Cathari  explained  the  esoteric  character 
of  this  prayer  by  that  passage  in  the  Apocalypse  which 

i"Omnes  praesentes  adoraverunt  haereticos  et  acceperunt  pacem  ab 
haereticis,  scilicet  homines  oscvdantes  haereticos  bis  in  ore  ex  transverso  et 
muHeres  acceperunt  pacem  a  libro  hccreticorum,  deinde  osculatae  fuerunt 
sese  ab  invicem  similiter  bis  in  ore  ex  transverso,"  etc.  DoUinger,  ibid., 
vol.  ii,  p.  41.  "Si  sint  illic  mulieres,  aHqua  illarum  recipit  pacem  de  cubito 
aUcujus  hsretici."  Sacconi,  in  Martene  and  Durand,  loc.  cit.,  vol.  v,  p.  1776. 
"Mulier  accepit  pacem  a  Hbro  et  humero  haereticorum."  Bollinger,  ibid., 
vol.  ii,  p.  34;  Rituel  cathare,  p.  xxi. 

2  "Quod  nullus  debebat  dicere  Paler  Noster,  quae  est  sancta  oratio,  nisi 
esset  haereticus  vestitus,"  etc.  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente), 
p.  199;  cf.  pp.  212,  237,  246. 


THE   INQUISITION  89 

speaks  of  the  one  hundred  and  forty-four  thousand  elect 
who  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever  He  goeth,  and  who 
sing  a  hymn  which  only  virgins  can  sing.^  This  hymn 
was  the  Pater  Noster?  Married  people,  therefore,  and 
consequently  ''the  Believers,"  could  not  repeat  it  without 
profanation.  But  "the  Perfected"  were  obliged  to  say 
it  every  day,  especially  before  meals.^ 

They  blessed  the  bread  without  making  the  sign  of  the 
cross. 

This  "breaking  of  bread"  replaced  the  Eucharist. 
They  thought  in  this  way  to  reproduce  the  Lord's 
Supper,  while  they  repudiated  all  the  ceremonies  of  the 
Catholic  mass.  "The  Believers"  partook  of  this  blessed 
bread  when  they  sat  at  the  table  with  "the  Perfected," 
and  they  were  wont  to  carry  some  of  it  home  to  eat  from 
time  to  time. 

Some  attributed  to  it  a  wonderful  sanctifying  power, 
and  believed  that  if  at  their  death  none  of  "the  Per- 
fected" were  present  to  administer  the  consolamentum, 
this  "bread  of  the  holy  prayer"  would  itself  ensure  their 

1  Apoc.  xiv,  1-4. 

^  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  328.  On  the  Catharan  text  of  the  Pater  Noster,  cf. 
Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,  p.  229. 

3"Promisit  quod  ulterius  non  esset  atque  comederet  sine  socio  et  sine 
oratione  et  quod  captus  sine  socio  non  comederet  per  triduum."  Doat, 
Acta  inquisitionis  Carcassoncs,  vol.  ii,  272.  The  Perfected  had  to  live  with 
a  socius  who  blessed  his  food,  while  he  in  turn  had  to  bless  the  food  of  his 
companion.  If  he  separated  from  his  socius,  he  had  to  do  without  food  and 
drink  for  three  days.  This  frequently  happened  when  they  were  arrested 
and  cast  into  prison. 


90  THE   INQUISITION 

salvation.^  They  were  therefore  very  anxious  to  keep 
some  of  it  on  hand;  and  we  read  of  ''the  Behevers"  of 
Languedoc  having  some  sent  them  from  Lombardy,  when 
they  were  no  longer  able  to  communicate  with  their 
persecuted  brethren.^ 

It  was  usually  distributed  to  all  present  during  the 
Apparellamentum.  This  was  the  solemn  monthly  reunion 
of  all  the  Cathari,  "the  Believers  "  and  "the  Perfected."  ^ 
All  present  confessed  their  sins,  no  matter  how  slight, 
although  only  a  general  confession  was  required.  As  a 
rule  the  Deacon  addressed  the  assembly,'*  which  closed 
with  the  Parcia  and  the  kiss  of  peace:  osculantes  sese 
invicem  ex  transversa.^ 

1  "Talem  panem  vocant  panem  sanctas  orationis  et  panem  fractionis,  et 
credentes  eorum  vocant  panem  benedictum  sive  panem  signatum."  Dol- 
linger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii,  p.  4.  "Respondit  ci  quod  dictus  panis  majorem 
virtutem  centies  habebat  quam  panis  qui  benedicitur  in  ccclesia  in  die  do- 
minica,  licet  non  fiat  signum  crucis  super  dictum  panem  nee  spargatur  aqua 
benedicta."  Ibid.,  p.  148.  "Geralda  .  .  .  fecit  fieri  de  pane  benedicto  per 
dictum  haereticum  propter  devotionem  et  fidem,  quam  habebat,  quod  posset 
salvari  in  fide  dicti  haeretici  et  accepit  de  dicto  pane  et  comedit  et  partem 
reservavit  et  multis  annis  conservavit,  et  aliquando  de  illo  pane  comedit." 
Limborch,  Sententice  inquisitionis  Tolos.,  p.  160.  "Dicta  Navarra  dixit  ipsas 
Lombardse  quod  tantum  valebat  panis  et  qui  vellet  habere  bonos  homines 
in  obitu  et  non  posset  habere  eos,  eo  quod  erat  panis  bonorum  hominum." 
Doat,  Acta  inquisit.  Carcass.,  vol.  v,  fol.  188. 

2  Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  p.  35. 

^"Servitium  hasreticorum  quod  dicunt  apparellamentum  quod  faciunt  de 
mense  in  mensem."  Doat,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  fol.  280.  ^'Apparellando  se  cum 
eis  de  mense  in  mensem  et  alia  omnia  faciendo  quae  heretici  praecipiunt  et 
faciunt  observari,"  etc.     Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  fol.  205. 

^  Sacconi,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  1765,  1766;  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  p.  306;  Doat,  Acta  In- 
quisit. Carcass.,  vol.  v,  fol.  246.     Cf.  Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,  pp.  232-235. 

*  Vaissete,  Histoire  du  Languedoc,  vol.  iii,  Preuves,  p.  387. 


THE   INQUISITION  91 

There  was  nothing  very  hard  in  this;  on  the  contrary 
it  was  the  consoling  side  of  their  life.  But  their  rigorous 
laws  of  fasting  and  abstinence  constituted  a  most  severe 
form  of  mortification. 

''The  Perfected"  kept  thfee  Lents  a  year;  the  first 
from  St.  Brice's  day  (November  13)  till  Christmas;  the 
second  from  Quinquagesima  Sunday  till  Easter;  the  third 
from  Pentecost  to  the  feast  of  Saints  Peter  and  Paul. 
They  called  the  first  and  last  weeks  of  these  Lents  the 
strict  weeks  (septimana  stricta),  because  during  them 
they  fasted  on  bread  and  water  every  day,  whereas  the 
rest  of  the  time  they  fasted  only  three  days  out  of  the 
seven.  Besides  these  special  penitential  seasons  they 
observed  the  same  rigorous  fast  three  days  a  week 
all  during  the  year,  unless  they  were  sick  or  were 
traveling.^ 

These  heretics  were  known  everywhere  by  their  fasting 
and  abstinence.  "They  are  good  men,"  it  was  said, 
"who  live  holy  lives,  fasting  three  days  a  week,  and  never 
eating  meat."  ^ 

They  never  ate  meat  in  fact,  and  this  law  of  abstinence 
extended,  as  we  have  seen,  to  eggs,  cheese,  and  every- 
thing which  was  the  result  of  animal  propagation.  They 
were  allowed,  however,  to    eat  cold-blooded  animals  like 

^  Bernard  Gui,  Practica  inquisitionis,  p.  239. 

2  Douai,  Les  manuscriis  du  chateau  de  Merville,  in  the  Annates  du  Midi, 
1890,  p.  185. 


^2  THE   INQUISITION 

fish,  because  of  the  strange  idea  they  had  of  their  method 
of  propagation.^ 

One  of  the  results,  or  rather  one  of  the  causes  of  their 
abstinence  from  meat  was  the  absolute  respect  they  had 
for  animal  life  in  general.  We  have  seen  that  they  ad- 
mitted metempsychosis.  According  to  their  belief,  the 
body  of  an  ox  or  an  ass  might  be  the  dwelling  place  of  a 
human  soul.  To  kill  these  animals,  therefore,  was  a  crime 
equivalent  to  murder.  "For  that  reason,"  says  Bernard 
Gui,  "they  never  kill  an  animal  or  a  bird;  for  they  believe 
that  in  animals  and  birds  dwell  the  souls  of  men,  who 
died  without  having  been  received  into  their  sect  by  the 
imposition  of  hands."  "  This  was  also  one  of  the  signs  by 
which  they  could  be  known  as  heretics.  We  read  of  them 
being  condemned  at  Goslar  and  elsewhere  for  having 
refused  to  kill  and  eat  a  chicken.^ 

Their  most  extraordinary  mortification  was  the  law  of 
chastity,  as  they  understood  and  practiced  it.  They  had 
a  great  horror  of  Christian  marriage,  and  endeavored 
to  defend  their  views  by  the  Scriptures.     Had  not  Christ 

1  "Numquam  comedunt  carnes  .  .  •  nee  caseum  nee  ova,  nee  aliquid  quod 
nascitur  per  viam  generationis  seu  coitus."  Bernard  Gui,  Practica  inquisi- 
tionis,  p.  240.  Cf.  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  ((Dokumenie),  pp.  22,  27,  30, 
145,  146,  149,  152,  181,  193,  234,  235,  246,  248,  282,  329.  Ms.  609 
of  Toulouse,  fol.  2  v°,  36,  39,  41,  46,  65.  Cf.  Jean  Guiraud;  La  morale 
des  Albegeois,  in  the  Questions  d'histoire  et  d'arcJieologie  chretienne,  pp. 
63-66. 

2  Practica  Inquisitionis,  p.  240. 

3  Cf.  Jean  Guiraud,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  63,  64,  69;  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i, 
p.  236. 


THE   INQUISITION  93 

said:  "Whosoever  should  look  upon  a  woman  to  lust 
after  her,  hath  already  committed  adultery  with  her  in 
his  heart";*  i.e.  was  he  not  guilty  of  a  crime.  "The 
children  of  this  world  marry,"  he  says  again,  "and  are 
given  in  marriage;  but  they  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy 
of  that  world,  and  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  shall 
neither  be  married  nor  take  wives."  ^  "It  is  good,"  says 
St.  Paul,  "for  a  man  not  to  touch  a  woman."  ^ 

The  Cathari  interpreted  these  texts  literally,  and  when 
theiropponents  cited  other  texts  of  Scripture  which  plainly 
taught  the  sacred  character  of  Christian  marriage,  they 
at  once  interpreted  them  in  a  spiritual  or  symbolic  sense. 
The  only  legitimate  marriage  in  their  eyes  was  the  union 
of  the  Bishop  with  the  Church,  or  the  union  of  the  soul 
with  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  ceremony  of  the  Consola- 
mentum.^ 

They  condemned  absolutely  all  marital  relations. 
That  was  the  sin  of  Adam  and  Eve.  Pierre  Garsias  taught 
at  Toulouse  that  the  forbidden  fruit  of  the  Garden  of 
Eden  was  simply  carnal  pleasure.^ 

One  of  the  purposes  of  marriage  is  the  begetting  of  chil- 
dren.    But    the    propagation    of   the    human    species   is 

1  Matt.  V,  28;  Dollinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  {Dokumente),  p.  56. 

2  Luke  XX,  35;  Dollinger,  loc.  cit.,  p.  91;  Moneta,  op.  cit.,  326. 

3  I  Corinth,  vii.  i,  7.     Dollinger,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii  {Dokumente),  p.  281. 

4  Dollinger,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  29,  54,  55;  cf.  vol.  i,  pp.  175-177. 

5  "Quod  pomum  vetitum  primis  parentibus  nil  aliud  fuit  quam  delectatio 
coitus,  et  addidit  quod  ipsum  pomum  porrexit  Adam  mulieri."  Dollinger, 
op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  p.  34;  cf.  p.  612,  cf.  p.  88. 


^4  THE   INQUISITION 

plainly  the  work  of  the  Evil  Spirit.  A  woman  with  child 
is  a  woman  possessed  of  the  devil.  "Pray  God/'  said 
one  of  "the  Perfected"  to  the  wife  of  a  Toulouse  lumber 
merchant,  "pray  God  that  he  deliver  you  from  the  devil 
within  you."  ^  The  greatest  evil  that  could  befall  a 
woman  was  to  die  enceinte;  for  being  in  the  state  of 
impurity  and  in  the  power  of  Satan,  she  could  not 
be  saved.  We  read  of  the  Cathari  saying  this  to  Peirona 
de  la  Caustra:  quod  si  decederet  prcegnans  non  posset 
salvari.^ 

Marriage,  because  it  made  such  a  condition  possible, 
was  absolutely  condemned.  Bernard  Gui  thus  resumes 
the  teaching  of  the  Cathari  on  this  point:  "They  con- 
demn marriage  absolutely;  they  maintain  that  it  is  a 
perpetual  state  of  sin;  they  deny  that  a  good  God 
can  institute  it.  They  declare  the  marital  relation  as 
great  a  sin  as  incest  with  one's  mother,  daughter,  or 
sister."  ^  And  this  is  by  no  means  a  calumnious  charge. 
The  language  which  Bernard  Gui  attributes  to  these 
heretics  was  used  by  them  on  every  possible  occasion. 
They  were  unable  'to  fmd  words  strong  enough  to  express 
their  contempt  for  marriage.  "  Marriage," _  they  said, 
"is  nothing  but  licentiousness;  marriage  is  merely  prosti- 

1  "Quod  rogaret  Deum  ut  liberaret  earn  de  daemone  quam  habebat  in 
ventre."  DoUinger,  ibid.,  p.  35.  "Quod  praegnans  erat  de  dzemonio." 
Ms.  609,  of  the  library  of  Toulouse,  fol.  230. 

2  Doat,  vol.  xxii,  p.  57. 

2  Practica  Inquisitionis,  p.  130. 


THE   INQUISITION  05 

tution/'  *  In  their  extreme  hatred,  they  even  went  so 
far  as  to  prefer  open  licentiousness  to  it,  saying:  "Co- 
habitation with  one's  wife  is  a  worse  crime  than  adultery." 
One  might  be  inclined  to  think  that  this  was  merely  an 
extra vagent  outburst;  but  on  the  contrary,  they  tried  to 
defend  this  view  by  reason.  Licentiousness,  they  argued, 
was  a  temporary  thing,  to  which  a  man  gave  himself  up 
only  in  secret;  he  might  in  time  become  ashamed  of  it, 
repent  and  renounce  it  entirely.  The  married  state  on 
the  contrary  caused  no  shame  whatever;  men  never 
thought  of  renouncing  it,  because  they  did  not  dream  of 
the  wickedness  it  entailed :  quia  magis  puhlice  et  sine  vere- 
cundia  peccatum  fiehat? 

No  one,  therefore,  was  admitted  to  the  consolamentiim 
unless  he  had  renounced  all  marital  relations.  In  this 
case,  the  woman  "gave  her  husband  to  God,  and  to  the 
good  men."  It  often  happened,  too,  that  women,  moved 
by  the  preaching  of  "the  Perfected,"  condemned  their 
unconverted   husbands   to   an  enforced  celibacy.^    This 

1  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  pp.  40,  156;  Ms.  609  of  Tou- 
louse, fol.  41  v°,  64. 

2  DoUinger,  ibid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  23;  cf.  156. 

3"Aladaicis,  uxor  infirmi,  absolvit  maritum  suum  Deo  et  bonis  homini- 
bus."  Doat,  Acta  inquisit.  Carcass.,  vol.  ii,  fol.  115.  "Forneria,  mater 
ipsius  testis,  fuit  haereticata  et  recessit  a  viro  suo."  Ibid.,  vol.  iv,  fol.  204. 
"Dixit  quod  ipsa  Aladaicis  libenter  dimitteret  virum  suum  et  teneret  fidem 
haereticorum  et  recederet  cum  haereticis,  si  placeret  eis."  DoUinger,  Bei- 
trdge, vol.  ii,  p.  24.  "Dixit  (haereticus)  ipsi  loquenti  si  ipse  vellet  dimittere 
dictam  Ramundam,  ipse  ex  parte  Dei  absolvebat  eum  de  dicto  matrimonio, 
et  sic  matrimonium  inter  eos  dictus  haereticus  separavit."     Ibid.,  p.   229. 


^6  THE   INQUISITION 

was  one  of  the  results  of  the  neo-Manichean  teach- 
ings. 

Moreover,  they  carried  their  principles  so  far  as  to  con- 
sider it  a  crime  even  to  touch  a  woman. 

They  forbade  a  man  to  sit  next  to  a  woman  except  in 
case  of  necessity.  "  If  a  woman  touches  you,"  said  Pierre 
Autier,  ''you  must  fast  three  days  on  bread  and  water; 
and  if  you  touch  a  woman,  you  must  fast  nine  days  on 
the  same  diet."  ^  At  the  ceremony  of  the  Consolamentum, 
the  Bishop  who  imposed  hands  on  the  future  sister  took 
great  care  not  to  touch  her,  even  with  the  end  of  his 
fmger;  to  avoid  doing  so,  he  always  covered  the  postulant 
with  a  veil.^ 

But  in  times  of  persecution,  this  over-scrupulous  caution 
was  calculated  to  attract  public  attention.  "The  Per- 
fected" (men  and  women)  lived  together,  pretending 
that  they  were  married,  so  that  they  would  not  be  known 
as  heretics.^  It  was  their  constant  care,  however, 
to  avoid  the  slightest  contact.  This  caused  them  at 
times  great  inconvenience.  While  traveling,  they  shared 
the  same  bed,  the  better  to  avoid  suspicion.     But  they 

Cf.  Jean  Guiraud,  La  morale  des  Alhigeois,  in  the  Questions  d'histoire,  pp. 
77-79. 

1  DoUinger,  Beitrage,  vol.  ii,  p.  243. 

2"Prius  posuerat  quemdam  pannum  linteum  album  super  dictam  infir- 
mam,"  etc.  Limborch,  Sententice  Inquisit.  Tolos.,  p.  186;  cf.  p.  190.  A 
father  forbade  his  daughter  to  touch  him,  because  he  had  received  the  con- 
solamentum.     Ibid.,  p.  iii. 

3  "Ego  non  sum  haereticus,"  said  a  heretic  of  Toulouse,  "quia  uxorem 
habeo  et  cum  ipsa  jaceo  et  filios  habeo,"  etc.  G.  Pelhisse,  Chronique,  ed. 
Douais,  p.  94. 


THE   INQUISITION  97 

slept  with  their  clothes  on,  and  thus  managed  to  follow 
out  the  letter  of  the  law:  tamen  induti  ita  quod  unus  alium 
in  nuda  came  non  tangehat} 

Many  Catholics  were  fully  persuaded  that  this  pre- 
tended love  of  purity  was  merely  a  cloak  to  hide  the  gross- 
est immorality .2  But  while  we  may  admit  that  many  of 
"the  Perfected"  did  actually  violate  their  promise  of 
absolute  chastity,  we  must  acknowledge  that  as  a  general 
rule  they  did  resist  temptation,  and  preferred  death  to 
what  they  considered  impurity. 

Many  who  feared  that  they  might  give  way  in  a  moment 
of  weakness  to  the  temptations  of  a  corrupt  nature  sought 
refuge  in  suicide,^  which  was  called  the  Endura.  There 
were  two  forms  for  the  sick  heretic,  suffocation  and  fast- 
ing. The  candidate  for  death  was  asked  whether  he 
desired  to  be  a  martyr  or  a  confessor.  If  he  chose  to  be 
a  martyr,  they  placed  a  handkerchief  or  a  pillow  over 
his  mouth,  until  he  died  of  suffocation.  If  he  preferred 
to  be  a  confessor,  he  remained  without  food  or  drink, 
until  he  died  of  starvation.* 

»  DoUinger,  Beiirdge,  vol.  ii,  pp.  148,  149- 

2Dollinger,  ibid.,  pp.  245,  296,  312,  371,  372. 

3  "Tunc  imponunt  ei  quod  non  debeat  amplius  comedere  carnem  nee  ova 
nee  easeum,  non  tangere  mulierem  .  .  .  ,  et  quod  si  non  posset  se  abstinere  a 
praedictis,  melius  est  quod  moriatur  en  la  endura,  quam  si  aliquid  prcedictorum 
transgrederetur."     Doat,  Acta  hiquisit.  Carcass.,  vol.  xxxii,  fol.  170. 

4"Quando  autem  in  extremo  vitae  perieulo  aliquem  reeipere  volunt,  dant 

ei  optionem  utrum  velit  in  regno  eoelorum  esse  eonsors  mart5T:um,  vel  eon- 

fessorum.     Si  elegerit  statum  martyrum,  tunc  manutergio  ad  hoe  speciahter 

deputato  .  .  .  strangulant  ipsum.     Si  statum  confessorum  elegerit,  tune  post 

8 


c)8  THE   INQUISITION 

The  Cathari  believed  that  "the  Believers,"  who  asked 
for  the  consolamentum  during  sickness,  would  not  keep 
the  laws  of  their  new  faith,  if  they  happened  to  get  well. 
Therefore,  to  safeguard  them  against  apostasy,  they 
were  strongly  urged  to  make  their  salvation  certain  by 
the  endura.  A  manuscript  of  the  Register  of  the  Inqui- 
sition of  Carcassonne,  for  instance,  tells  us  of  a  Cath- 
aran  minister  who  compelled  a  sick  woman  to  undergo 
the  endura,  after  he  had  conferred  upon  her  the  Holy 
Spirit.  He  forbade  any  one  *'to  give  her  the  least 
nourishment  .  .  .  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  no  food  or 
drink  was  given  her  that  night  or  the  following  day, 
lest  perchance  she  might  be  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  the 
consolamentum."  ^ 

One  of  "the  Perfected,"  named  Raymond  Belhot, 
congratulated  a  mother  whose  daughter  he  had  just 
"consoled,"  and  ordered  her  not  to  give  the  sick  girl 
anything  to  eat  or  drink  until  he  returned,  even 
though  she  requested  it.  "  If  she  asks  me  for  it," 
said  the  mother,  "I  will  not  have  the  heart  to  re- 
fuse her."  "You  must  refuse  her,"  said  "the  good 
man,"  "or  else  cause  great  injury  to  her  soul."  From 
that  moment  the  girl  neither  ate  nor  drank;  in  fact  she 

manus  impositionem  nihil  dant  ei  ad  visum  vel  ad  esum,  nisi  puram  aquam 
ad  bibendum,  et  ita  fame  ipsum  perimunt."  DoUinger,  ibid.,  p.  373  (this 
passage  is  taken  from  the  Summa  de  Cathari s  of  Sacconi).  Cf.  pp.  271,370. 
i"Ne  dicta  infirma  perderet  bonum  quod  receperat."  Ms.  609  of  the 
library  of  Toulouse,  fob  134. 


THE    INQUISITION  99 

did  not  ask  for  any  nourishment.  She  died  the  next 
Saturday.^ 

About  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  when  the 
Cathari  began  to  give  the  consolamentum  to  infants,  they 
were  often  cruel  enough  to  make  them  undergo  the  en- 
dura.  "One  would  think,"  says  an  historian  of  the  time, 
"that  the  world  had  gone  back  to  those  hateful  days 
when  unnatural  mothers  sacrificed  their  children  to 
Moloch."  2 

It  sometimes  happened  that  the  parents  of  "the  con- 
soled" withstood  more  or  less  openly  the  cruelty  of  "the 
Perfected." 

When  this  happened,  some  of  "the  Perfected"  re- 
mained in  the  house  of  the  sick  person,  to  see  that  their 
murderous  prescriptions  were  obeyed  to  the  letter.  Or 
if  this  was  impossible,  they  had  "the  consoled"  taken 
to  the  house  of  some  friend,  where  they  could  readily 
carry  out  their  policy  of  starvation.^ 

But  as  a  general  rule  the  "heretics"  submitted  to  the 
endura  of  their  own  free  will.  Raymond  Isaure  tells  us 
of  a  certain  Guillaume  Sabatier,  who  began  the  endura  in  a 
retired  villa,  immediately  after  his  initiation;  he  starved 

1  DoUinger,  Beitrage,  vol.  ii  (Dokumente),  p.  250. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  i,  p.  222;  cf.  p.  193. 

3  "Post  aliquot  dies  (after  the  Catharan  initiation)  haeretici  extraxerunt 
dictum  infirmum  de  domo  sua  et  portaverunt  in  domum  hasreticorum,  et  ibi 
dictus  infirmus  obiit."  Doat,  Acta  InquisH.  Carcass.,  vol.  ii,  fol.  115.  This 
was  a  frequent  case  in  the  Acts  of  the  Inquisition  of  Carcassonne,  says  Dol- 
linger,  Beitrage,  vol.  i,  p.  225,  n.  i. 


100  THE   INQUISITION 

himself  to  death  in  seven  weeks.^  A  woman  named 
Gentilis  died  of  the  endura  in  six  or  seven  days.^  A 
woman  of  Coustaussa,  who  had  separated  from  her  hus- 
band, went  to  Saverdum  to  receive  the  consolamentum. 
She  at  once  began  the  endura  at  Ax,  and  died  after 
an  absolute  fast  of  about  twelve  weeks.^  A  certain 
woman  named  Montaliva  submitted  to  the  endura; 
during  it  "she  ate  nothing  whatever,  but  drank  some 
water;  she  died  in  six  weeks."  ^  This  case  gives  us 
some  idea  of  this  terrible  practice;  we  see  that  they 
were  sometimes  allowed  to  drink  water,  which  explains 
the  extraordinary  duration  of  some  of  these  suicidal 
fasts.^ 

Some  of  the  Cathari  committed  suicide  in  other  ways. 
A  woman  of  Toulouse  named  Guillemette  first  began  to 
subject  herself  to  the  endura  by  frequent  blood  letting; 
then  she  tried  to  weaken  herself  more  by  taking  long 
baths;  finally  she  drank  poison,  and  as  death  did  not  come 
quickly  enough,   she  swallowed  pounded  glass   to  per- 

1  DoUinger,  ihid.,  vol.  ii,  p.  19. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  24. 

3"Qusedam  mulier  de  Constanciano  .  .  .  qua  dimiserat  maritum  suum 
et  fugerat  ad  partes  Savartesii,  misit  se  ad  enduram  .  .  .;  duodecim 
septimanis  vel  circa,  antequam  moreretur,  stetit  in  endura^  Ibid., 
p.   25. 

4  Ms.  609,  of  the  library  of  Toulouse,  fol.  28.  Cf.  Dollinger,  Beitrdge, 
vol.  ii,  p.  26.  "Posuit  se  et  stetit  in  endura  donee  fuit  mortua,  ita  quod 
nihil  comedebat,  nee  bibebat  nisi  aquam." 

2  Sometimes  the  heretics  undergoing  the  endura  put  sugar  in  the  water 
they  drank,  aquam  cum  zucara.     Limborch,  Liber  sentent,  fol.  79  B. 


THE   INQUISITION  loi 

forate  her  intestines.^  Another  woman  opened  her  veins 
in  the  bath.^ 

Such  methods  of  suicide  were  exceptional,  although 
the  endura  itself  was  common,^  at  least  among  the  Cathari 
of  Languedoc.^  "Every  one,"  says  a  trustworthy  his- 
torian, "who  reads  the  acts  of  the  tribunals  of  the  In- 
quisition of  Toulouse  and  Carcassonne  must  admit  that 
the  endura,  voluntary  or  forced,  put  to  death  more  vic- 
tims than  the  stake  of  the  Inquisition/'^ 

Catharism,  therefore,  was  a  serious  menace  to  the 
church,  to  the  state,  and  to  society. 

Without  being  precisely  a  Christian  heresy,  its  customs, 
its  hierarchy,  and  above  all  its  rites  of  initiation  —  which 

1  Ms.  609,  of  Toulouse,  fol.  33. 

2  Ibid.,  fol.  70.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cii.,  pp.  224,  225. 

3 "  Haereticati  seu  in  sanitate  seu  in  asgritudine  ex  tunc  non  debebant 
comedere  aliquid  vel  bibere,  sed  si  non  possent  abstinere  a  potu,  debebant 
bibere  aquam  frigidam,  et  sic  mori  en  la  endura  erat  magnum  meritum,  et 
quando  moriebantur,  eorum  anima  ibat  ad  regnum  patris.  Audivit  etiam, 
quod  si  haereticati  facerent  se  minui,  quousque  totus  sanguis  de  corpore 
exivisset,  bonum  opus  faciebant,  ut  sic  cito  mori  possent  et  cito  venire  ad 
gloriam  Patris.  Et  taliter  occidere  se  non  reputabant  malum  vel  peccatum, 
sed  bonum  et  meritum."       DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.   ii  (Dokumente),  p.    248. 

■4  Molinier  {U Endura,  pp.  293,  294)  thinks  that  this  practice  was  peculiar 
to  Languedoc,  and  only  came  into  vogue  at  the  close  of  the  thirteenth  century. 
In  this  hypothesis,  we  must  hold  not  only  that  Sacconi's  Summa  de  Catharis 
is  interpolated  (cf.  supra,  p.  116),  but  also  that  those  guilty  of  the  interpolation 
were  men  of  Languedoc.     This  last  conjecture  is  rather  improbable. 

5  DoUinger,  Beitrdge,  vol.  i,  p.  226.  Cf.  cases  of  endura  cited  by  Bol- 
linger, op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  pp.  20,  24,  25,  26,  37,  136,  138,  139,  141,  142,  147. 
157,  205,  234,  238,  239,  242,  248,  250,  271,  295,  370,  373.  Molinier  (UEn- 
dura,  p.  288)  himself  writes:  "Cruel  as  it  was,  the  endura  seems  always  to 
have  accompanied  the  consolamenium,  at  least  with  some  of  the  Albigensian 
ministers." 


102  THE    INQUISITION 

we  have  purposely  explained  in  detail  —  gave  it  all  the 
appearance  of  one.  It  was  really  an  imitation  and  a 
caricature  of  Christianity.  Some  of  its  practices  were 
borrowed  from  the  primitive  Christians,  as  some  histo- 
rians have  proved.^  That  in  itself  would  justify  the 
Church  in  treating  its  followers  as  heretics. 

Besides,  the  Church  merely  acted  in  self-defense.  The 
Cathari  tried  their  best  to  destroy  her  by  attacking  her 
doctrines,  her  hierarchy,  and  her  apostolic  character.  If 
their  false  teachings  had  prevailed,  disturbing  as  they 
did  the  minds  of  the  people,  the  Church  would  have 
perished. 

The  princes,  who  did  not  concern  themselves  with  these 
heretics  while  they  merely  denied  the  teachings  of  the 
Church,  at  last  found  themselves  attacked  just  as  vigor- 
ously. The  Catharan  absolute  rejection  of  the  oath  of 
fealty  was  calculated  to  break  the  bond  that  united  sub- 
jects to  their  suzerain  lords,  and  at  one  blow  to  destroy  the 
whole  edifice  of  feudalism.  And  even  granting  that  the 
feudal  system  could  cease  to  exist  without  dragging  down 
in  its  fall  all  form  of  government,  how  could  the  State 
provide  for  the  public  welfare,  if  she  did  not  possess  the 
power  to  punish  criminals,  as  the  Cathari  maintained  ? 

But  the  great  unpardonable  crime  of  Catharism  was 
its  attempt  to  destroy  the  future  of  humanity  by  its 

1  Jean  Guiraud,  Le  consolamentum  ou  initiation  catliare,  in  Questions 
(Thistoire,  p.  145  seq. 


THE    INQUISITION  103 

endura,  and  its  abolition  of  marriage.  It  taught  that 
the  sooner  life  was  destroyed  the  better.  Suicide,  instead 
of  being  considered  a  crime,  was  a  means  of  perfection. 
To  beget  children  was  considered  the  height  of  immorality. 
To  become  one  of  "the  Perfected,"  which  was  the  only 
way  of  salvation,  the  husband  must  leave  his  wife,  and 
the  wife  her  husband.  The  family  must  cease  to  exist, 
and  all  men  were  urged  to  form  a  great  religious  com- 
munity, vowed  to  the  most  rigorous  chastity.  Ifthis 
ideal  had  been  realized,  the  human  race  would  have  dis- 
appeared from  the  earth  in  a  few  years.  Can  any  one 
imagine  more  immoral  and  more  anti-social  teaching? 

The  Catholic  Church  has  been  accused  of  setting  up  a 
similar  ideal. ^  This  is  a  gross  calumny.  For  while 
Catharism  made  chastity  a  sine  qua  non  of  salvation,  and 
denounced  marriage  as  something  infamous  and  criminal, 
the  Church  merely  counsels  virginity  to  an  elite  body 
of  men  and  women  in  whom  she  recognizes  the  marks  of 
a  special  vocation,  according  to  the  teaching  of  the  Savior, 
''He  that  can  take,  let  him  take  it."  Qui  potest  capere 
capiat.^  She  endeavors  at  the  same  time  to  uphold  the 
sacrament  of  marriage,  declaring  it  a  holy  state,^  in  which 
the  majority  of  mankind  is  to  work  out  its  salvation. 

There  is  consequently  no  parity  whatever  between  the 

^  Molinier  repeats  this  accusation  {U Endura,  p.  282,  n.  2). 

2  Matt.  xix.  11-12. 

3  Cf.  Summa  contra  hareticos,  pp.  96-99. 


104  THE   INQUISITION 

two  societies  and  their  teachings.  In  bitterly  prosecuting 
the  Cathari,  the  Church  truly  acted  for  the  public  good. 
The  State  was  bound  to  aid  her  by  force,  unless  it  wished 
to  perish  herself  with  all  the  social  order.  This  explains 
and  to  a  certain  degree  justifies  the  combined  action  of 
Church  and  State  in  suppressing  the  Catharan  heresy, 


CHAPTER    VI 

FIFTH   PERIOD 

Gregory  IX  and  Frederic  II 

The  Establishment  of  the  Monastic  Inquisition 

The  penal  system  codified  by  Innocent  III  was  rather 
liberally  interpreted  in  France  and  Italy.  In  order  to 
make  the  French  law  agree  with  it,  an  oath  was  added  to 
the  coronation  service  from  the  time  of  Louis  IX,  whereby 
the  King  swore  to  exterminate,  i.e.,  banish  all  heretics 
from  his  kingdom.^  We  are  inclined  to  interpret  in  this 
sense  the  laws  of  Louis  VIII  (1226)  and  Louis  IX  (April, 
1228),  for  the  south  of  France.  The  words  referring  to 
the  punishment  of  heretics  are  a  little  vague:  ''Let  them 
be  punished,"  says  Louis  VIII,  with  the  punishment  they 
deserve."  "  Animadversione  debita  puntantur.  The  other 
penalties  specified  are  infamy  and  confiscation ;  in  a  word, 
all  the  consequences  of  banishment."^ 

1  Godefroy,  Le  ceremonial  fran^ais,  vol.  i,  p.  27.  We  have  seen  that  the 
Council  of  Avignon  and  the  town  of  Montpellier  adopted  the  laws  of  Innocent 
III. 

2  "Statuimus  quod  haeretici  qui  a  catholica  fide  deviant,  quocumque  nomine 
censeantur,  postquam  fuerint  de  hasresi  per  episcopum  loci  vel  per  aliam 
personam  ecclesiasticam  quae  potestatem  habeat  (papal  legate)  condemnati, 
indilate  animadversione  debita  puniantur,"  etc.  Ordonnances  des  roys  de 
France,  vol.  xii,  pp.  319,  320. 

105 


,o6  THE   INQUISITION 

Louis  IX  re-enacted  this  law  in  the  following  terms: 
"We  decree  that  our  barons  and  magistrates  .  .  . 
do  their  duty  in  prosecuting  heretics."  "De  ipsis  fesii- 
nanter  faciant  quod  debebunt"  '  These  words  in  them- 
selves are  not  very  clear,  and,  if  we  were  to  interpret  them 
by  the  customs  of  a  few  years  later,^  we  might  think  that 
they  referred  to  the  death  penalty,  even  the  stake;  but 
comparing  them  with  similar  expressions  used  by  Lucius 
III  and  Innocent  III,  we  see  that  they  imply  merely  the 
penalty  of  banishment. 

However,  a  canon  of  the  Council  of  Toulouse  in  1229 
seems  to  make  the  meaning  of  these  words  clear,  at  least 
for  the  future.  It  decreed  that  all  heretics  and  their 
abettors  are  to  be  brought  to  the  nobles  and  the  magis- 
trates to  receive  due  punishment,  ut  animadver stone  debita 
puntantur.  But  it  adds  that  "heretics,  who,  through  fear 
of  death  or  any  other  cause,  except  their  own  free  will, 
return  to  the  faith,  are  to  be  imprisoned  by  the  bishop  of 
the  city  to    do    penance,  that    they  may  not    corrupt 

i"Statuimus  et  mandamus  ut  barones  terrai  .  .  .  solliciti  sint  et  .  .  . 
predictos  (hcereticos)  diligenter  investigare  studeant  et  fideliter  invenire,  et 
cum  eos  invenerint,  prssentent  sine  mora  .  .  .  personis  ccclesiasticis  superius 
memoratis,  ut,  eis  praesentibus,  de  errore  haeresis  condemnatis,  omni  odio, 
prece  et  pretio  .  .  .  postpositis,  de  ipsis  festinanter  faciant  quod  debebunt." 
Ordonnances  des  roys  de  France,  vol.  i,  p.  51;  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  vii,  col.  171. 

2  We  will  mention  later  on  the  penalties  decreed  against  heretics  in  the 
Etablissements  de  Saint  Louis  and  the  Coutumes  de  Beauvaisis  de  Beaumanoir. 
Julien  Havet  {op.  cit.,  pp.  169,  170),  however,  explains  the  animadversio 
debita  of  the  laws  of  Louis  VIII  and  Louis  IX  in  accordance  with  the  later 
documents,  i.e.  the  penalty  of  the  stake. 


THE    INQUISITION  107 

others";  the  bishop  is  to  provide  for  their  needs  out  of 
the  property  confiscated.^  The  fear  of  death  here  seems 
to  imply  that  the  animadversio  dehita  meant  the  death 
penalty.  That  would  prove  the  elasticity  of  the  formula. 
At  first  it  was  a  legal  penalty  which  custom  interpreted 
to  mean  banishment  and  confiscation;  later  on  it  meant 
chiefly  the  death  penalty;  and  finally  it  meant  solely  the 
penalty  of  the  stake.  At  any  rate,  this  canon  of  the 
Council  of  Toulouse  must  be  kept  in  mind;  for  we  will  soon 
see  Pope  Gregory  IX  quoting  it. 

In  Italy,  Frederic  II  promulgated  on  November  22, 
1220,  an  imperial  law  which,  in  accordance  with  the 
pontifical  decree  of  March  25,  1199,  and  the  Lateran 
Council  of  121 5,  condemned  heretics  to  every  form  of 
banishment,  to  perpetual  infamy,  together  with  the  con- 
fiscation of  their  property,  and  the  annulment  of  all  their 
civil  acts  and  powers.  It  is  evident  that  the  emperor 
was  influenced  by  Innocent  III,  for  having  declared 
that  the  children  of  heretics  could  not  inherit  their  father's 
property,  he  adds  a  phrase  borrowed  from  the  papal 
decree  of  1199,  viz.,  ''that  to  offend  the  divine  majesty 

1  "Haereticos,  credentes,  fautores  et  receptatores  seu  defensores  eorum, 
adhibita  cautela  ne  fugere  possint,  archiepiscopo  vel  episcopo,  dominis 
locorum  seu  bajulis  eorumdem  cum  omni  festinantia  studeant  intimare,  ut 
animadversione  dehita  puniantur  .  .  .  Haeretici  autem  qui  timore  mortis  vel 
alia  quacumque  causa,  dummodo  non  sponte,  redierent  ad  catholicam  unita- 
tem,  ad  agendam  poenitentiam  per  episcopum  loci  in  muro  tali  includantur 
cautela  quod  facultatem  non  habeant  alios  corrumpendi."  D'Achery, 
Spicilegium,  in-fol.,  vol.  i,  p.  711. 


,o8  THE   INQUISITION 

was  a  far  greater  crime  than  to  offend  the  majesty  of  the 
emperor."  ^ 

This  at  once  put  heresy  on  a  par  with  treason,  and 
consequently  called  for  a  severer  punishment  than  the 
law  actually  decreed.  We  will  soon  see  others  draw  the 
logical  conclusion  from  the  emperor's  comparison,  and 
enact  the  death  penalty  for  heresy. 

The  legates  of  Pope  Honorius  were  empowered  to  in- 
troduce the  canonical  and  imperial  legislation  into  the 
statutes  of  the  Italian  cities,  which  hitherto  had  not 
been  at  all  anxious  to  take  any  measures  whatever 
against  heretics.  They  succeeded  in  Bergamo,  Piacenza, 
and  Mantua  in  1221;^  and  in  Brescia  in  1225.^  In 
1226,  the  emperor  himself  ordered  the  podesta  of  Pavia 
to  banish  all  heretics  from  the  city  limits.''  About 
the  year  1230,  therefore,  it  was  the  generally  accepted 

i"Catharos,  Paterenos,  Leonistas,  Speronistas,  Arnoldistas,  et  omnes 
haereticos  utriusque  sexus,  quocumque  nomine  censeantur,  perpetua  dampna- 
mus  infamia,  diffidamus  atque  bannimus,  censentes  ut  bona  talium  confis- 
centur  nee  ad  eos  revertantur,  ita  quod  61ii  ad  successionem  eorum  pervenire 
non  possint,  cum  longe  gravius  sit  aeternam  quam  temporalem  offendere 
majestatem,"  etc.,  cap.  vi;  cf.  cap.  vii.  Monum.  GernianicB,  Leges,  sect, 
iv,  vol.  ii,  pp.  107-109. 

2  The  Latin,  Ms.  5152  at  the  National  library  of  Paris  contains  the  Acta 
of  Cardinal  Hugolino  of  1221,  regarding  the  changes  in  the  statutes  of  the 
various  Italian  cities.  In  the  statutes  of  Piacenza,  for  example,  he  had  in- 
serted de  verho  ad  verbum  statutum  ultinii  Lateranensis  concilii  {\ 21^)  et  leges 
domini  imperatoris  Frederici  super  hcereticis  expellendis  et  conservanda  ecclesi- 
astica  libertate.     For  more  details,  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  196,  with  references. 

3  Cf .  Raynaldi,  Annal.  Eccles.,  for  the  year  1225,  sect.  47;  cf.  Ficker, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  199,  200. 

*  Cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  430. 


THE   INQUISITION  109 

law  throughout  all  Italy  (recall  what  we  have  said  above 
about  Faenza,  Florence,  etc.)  to  banish  all  heretics,  con- 
fiscate their  property,  and  demolish  their  houses. 

Two  years  had  hardly  elapsed  when,  through  the  joint 
efforts  of  Frederic  II  and  Gregory  IX,  the  death  penalty 
of  the  stake  was  substituted  for  banishment;^  Guala,  a 
Dominican,  seems  to  have  been  the  prime  mover  in  bring- 
ing about  this  change. 

Frederic  II,  influenced  by  the  jurists  who  were  reviv- 
ing the  old  Roman  law,^  promulgated  a  law  for  Lom- 
bardy  in  1224,  which  condemned  heretics  to  the  stake, 
or  at  least  to  have  their  tongues  cut  out.^  This  penalty 
of  the  stake  was  common  —  if  not  legal  —  in  Germany. 
For  instance,  we  read  of  the  people  of  Strasburg  burning 
about  eighty  heretics  about  the  year  1212,^  and  we  could 

1  We  have  seen  above  (p.  64)  that  according  to  both  the  civil  and  canon 
law  heretics  were  subject  to  the  death-penalty  throughout  the  Middle  Ages. 
But  the  laws  of  Frederic  II  induced  the  Pope  to  inflict  this  penalty  of  the 
stake. 

2  In  1 23 1,  in  his  law  Inconsutilem  tunicam,  the  emperor  made  a 
direct  reference  to  the  old  Roman  laW:  Proiit  veteribus  legibus  est 
indicium . 

3"Utriusque  juris  auctoritate  muniti  .  .  .  duximus  sanciendum:  ut  qui- 
cumque  per  civitatis  antistitem  vel  dioecesis  in  qua  degit,  post  condignam 
examinationem  fuerit  de  hceresi  manifeste  convictiis  et  hcBreticus  judicatus,  per 
potestatem,  concilium  et  catholicos  viros  civitatis  et  dioecesis  eorumdem,  ad 
requisiiionem  antistitis  illico  capiatur,  auctoritate  nostra  ignis  judicio  con- 
cremandus,  ut  vel  ultricibus  flammis  pereat,  aut,  si  miserabili  vitae  ad  coer- 
citionem  aliorum  elegerint  reservandum,  eum  lingucc  plectro  deprivent,"  etc. 
A  Constitution  sent  to  the  Archbishop  of  Magdeburg,  in  the  Mon.  Germ., 
Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  126. 

^"Haeretici  .  .  .  comprehensi  sunt  in  civitate  Argentina.  Producti,  vero 
cum  negarent  hseresim,  judicio  ferri  candentis  ad  legitimum  terminum  reser- 


no  THE   INQUISITION 

easily  cite  other  similar  executions.^  The  emperor,  there- 
fore, merely  brought  the  use  of  the  stake  from  Germany 
into  Italy.  Indeed  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  this  law 
was  in  operation  before  1230.^ 

But  in  that  year,  Guala,  the  Dominican,  who  had  be- 
come Bishop  of  Brescia,^  used  his  authority  to  enact 
for  his  episcopal  city  the  most  severe  laws  against 
heresy.  The  podesta  of  the  city  had  to  swear  that  he 
would  prosecute  heretics  as  Manicheans  and  traitors, 
according  to  both  the  canon  and  the  civil  law,  especially 
in  view  of  Frederic's  law  of  1224.'*  Innocent  Ill's  com- 
parison between  heretics  and  traitors,  and  between  the 
Cathari  and  the  Manicheans,  now  bore  fruit.  Traitors 
deserved  the  death  penalty,  while  the  old  Roman 
law    sent    the    Manicheans    to    the    stake;    accordingly 

vantur,  quorum  numerus  fuit  octoginta  vel  amplius  de  utroque  sexu.  Et 
pauci  quidem  ex  eis  innocentes  apparuerunt,  reliqui  omnes  coram  ecclesia 
convicti  per  adustionem  dampnati  sunt  et  incendio  perierunt."  Amiales 
Marbacenses,  ad  arm.  1215,  in  the  Mon  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xvii,  p.  174. 

1  Cf.  Julien  Havet,  op.  ciL,  pp.  143,  144. 

2  Cf.  on  this  point  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  198,  430,  431. 
^  On  Guala,  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  199-201. 

^  "Infra  decern  dies,"  says  the  podesta,  "  eos  et  eas  puniam  velut  haereticos 
Manicheos  et  reos  criminum  lese  majestatis  secundum  leges  et  jura  imperialia 
et  canonica  et  specialiter  infra  scriptam  legem  Domini  Frederici  imperatoris 
et  secundum  ejus  tenorem."  Then  follows  the  imperial  law  of  1224.  This 
statute  of  the  city  of  Brescia  is  found  in  the  Monumenta  historic  patricB, 
vol.  xvi,  pp.  1584,  1644.  On  the  date,  1130,  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  199.  We 
know  that  Innocent  III,  in  his  law  of  1199,  was  the  first  to  put  heresy  on  a 
par  with  treason,  although  he  did  not  draw  the  logical  conclusion  from  this 
comparison.  He  also  compared  the  Cathari  and  the  Patarins  to  the  Man- 
icheans (Ep.  X,  54),  without  saying  anything  about  the  death  penalty.  Guala 
drew  the  logical  conclusion. 


THE   INQUISITION  m 

Gaula  maintained  that  all  heretics  deserved  the 
stake. 

Pope  Gregory  IX  adopted  this  stern  attitude,  probably 
under  the  influence  of  the  Bishop  of  Brescia,  with  whom 
he  was  in  frequent  correspondence.^  The  imperial  law  of 
1 224  was  inscribed  in  1230  or  1231  upon  the  papal  register, 
where  it  figures  as  number  103  of  the  fourth  year  of 
Gregory's  pontificate.^  The  Pope  then  tried  to  enforce 
it,  beginning  with  the  city  of  Rome.  He  enacted  a  law 
in  February,  1231,  ordering,  as  the  Council  of  Toulouse 
had  done  in  1229,  heretics  condemned  by  the  Church 
to  be  handed  over  to  the  secular  arm,  to  receive  the 
punishment  they  deserved,  animadversio  dehita.  All  who 
abjured  and  accepted  a  fitting  penance  were  to  be  im- 
prisoned for  life,  without  prejudice  to  the  other  penalties 
for  heresy,  such  as  confiscation. ^ 

About  the  same  time,  Annibale,  the  Senator  of  Rome, 

1  Cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  200.  Gregory  IX  was  four  years  Pope  before  he 
enacted  these  new  laws. 

2  Dampnati  vero  per  ecclesiam  scculari  judicio  relinquantur  animadver- 
sione  dehita  puniendi,  clericis  prius  a  suis  ordinibus  degradatis.  Si  qui  autem 
de  predictis,  postquam  fuerint  deprehensi,  redire  voluerint  ad  agendam  con- 
dignam  poenitentiam,  in  perpetuo  carcere  detrudantur.  Registers  of  Gregory 
IX,  n.  539;  Raynaldi,  Annates,  ad  ann.  1231,  sects.  14-15;  inserted  in  the 
Decretales,  cap.  xv,  De  hcereticis,  Hb.  v,  tit.  vii,  where,  in  place  of  redire  vol- 
uerint, we  read  noluerint.  Voluerint  is  the  true  reading,  as  we  may  prove 
by  comparison  with  the  text  of  the  Council  of  Toulouse  (1229),  and  the 
imperial  law  of  1231,  in  which  Frederic  II,  writes:  "Si  qui  de  predictis, 
postquam  fuerint  deprehensi,  territu  mortis  redire  voluerint  ad  agendam 
poenitentiam,  in  perpetuum  carcerem  detrudantur."  Cap.  ii,  Mon.  Germ., 
Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p  196. 


112  THE   INQUISITION 

established  the  new  jurisprudence  of  the  Church  in  the 
eternal  city.  Every  year,  on  taking  office,  the  Senator 
was  to  banish  (diffidare)  all  heretics.  All  who  refused  to 
leave  the  city  were,  eight  days  after  their  condemnation, 
to  receive  the  punishment  they  deserved.  The  penalty, 
animadversio  dehita,  is  not  specified,  as  if  every  one  knew 
what  was  meant. ^ 

Inasmuch  as  repentant  heretics  were  imprisoned  for 
life,  it  seems  certain  that  the  severer  penalty  reserved  for 
obstinate  heretics  must  have  been  the  death  penalty  of 
the  stake,  for  that  was  the  mode  of  punishment  decreed 
by  the  imperial  law  of  1224,  which  had  just  been  copied 
on  the  registers  of  the  papal  chancery.  But  we  are  not 
left  to  mere  conjecture.  In  February,  1231,  a  number 
of  Patarins  were  arrested  in  Rome;  those  who  refused 
to  abjure  were  sent  to  the  stake,  while  those  who  did 
abjure  were    sent   to   Monte-Cassino   and    Cava    to    do 

1  "Omnes  haeretici  in  Urbe  .  .  .  singulis  annis  a  senatore,  quando  regiminis 
sui  prsestiterit  juramentum,  perpetuo  diffidantur.  Item  haereticos  qui  fuerint 
in  Urbe  reperti  praesertim  per  inquisitores  datos  ab  Ecclesia  vel  alios  viros 
catholicos  senator  capere  teneatur  et  captos  etiam  detinere,  postquam  fuerint 
per  Ecclesiam  condempnati,  infra  octo  dies  animadversione  debita  puniendos." 
Raynaldi,  ad  ann.  1231,  sect.  16-17;  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  205.  These  statutes 
are  similar  to  those  of  Brescia  (1230);  the  statutes  of  Bologna  (1246)  read: 
"Hgeretici  et  fautores  eorum  in  perpetuo  banno  ponantur  et  alias  pasnas  et 
alias  injurias  sustineant  secundum  formam  Statutorum  Domini  papae  Gre- 
gorii."  Consequently,  the  podesta  had  to  swear  that  he  would  banish  all 
heretics;  if  they  remained  in  the  city,  and  refused  to  abjure,  they  were  con- 
demned and  burned.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  205,  206.  We  see  that  the  penalty 
of  the  stake  was  enforced  only  when  the  penalty  of  banishment  had  proved 
inefficacious.    This  reminds  us  of  the  law  of  Pedro,  King  of  Aragon  in  1197. 


THE   INQUISITION  113 

penance.*  This"  case  tells  us  instantly  how  we  are  to 
interpret  the  antmadversio  dehita  of  contemporary  doc- 
uments. 

Frederic  II  exercised  an  undeniable  influence  over 
Gregory  IX,  and  the  Pope  in  turn  influenced  the  emperor. 
Gregory  wrote  denouncing  the  many  heretics  who  swarmed 
throughout  the  kingdom  of  Sicily  (the  two  Sicilies), 
especially  in  Naples  and  Aversa,  urging  him  to  prosecute 
them  with  vigor.  Frederic  obeyed.^  He  was  then  pre- 
paring his  Sicilian  Code,  which  appeared  at  Amalfi  in 
August,  1 23 1.  The  first  law,  Inconsuiilem  tunicam,  was 
against  heretics.  The  emperor  did  not  have  to  consult 
any  one  about  the  penalty  to  be  decreed  against  heresy; 
he  had  merely  to  copy  his  own  law,  enacted  in  Lombardy 
in  1224.  This  new  law  declared  heresy  a  crime  against 
society  on  a  par  with  treason,  and  liable  to  the  same 
penalty.  And  that  the  law  might  not  be  a  dead  letter 
for  lack  of  accusers,  the  state  officials  were  commanded 
to  prosecute  it  just  as  they  would  any  other  crime.     This 

1  "Eodem  mense  (February),  nonnulli  Paterenorum  in  Urbe  invent!  sunt, 
quorum  alii  sunt  igne  cremati,  cum  inconvertibiles  essent;  alii  donee  poeniteant 
sunt  ad  Casinensem  ecclesiam  et  apud  Cavas  directi."  Ryccardus  de  S. 
Germano,  ad  ann.  1231,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xix,  p.  363;  cf.  Viia 
Gregorii,  in  Muratori,  Reruni  italicarum  SS.,  vol.  iii,  p.  578.  On  March  3d, 
Gregory  sent  a  number  of  heretics  to  the  Abbot  of  La  Cava,  ordering  him 
to  keep  them  in  arctissima  fovea  et  sub  vinculis  jerreis.  Cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit., 
p.  207. 

2  Cf.  the  reply  of  Frederic  to  Gregory  IX,  February  28,  1231,  in  Huillard- 
Breolles,  Historia  diplomatica  Frederici  II,  vol.  iii,  p.  268.  Ryccardus  de 
S.  Germano,  loc.  cit. 

9 


1,4  THE    INQUISITION 

was  in  reality  the  beginning  of  the  Inquisition.  All  sus- 
pects were  to  be  tried  by  an  ecclesiastical  tribunal,  and 
if,  being  declared  guilty,  they  refuse  to  abjure,  they  were 
to  be  burned  in  presence  of  the  people.^ 

Once  started  on  the  road  to  severity,  Frederic  II  did 
not  stop.  To  aid  Gregory  IX  in  suppressing  heresy,  he 
enacted  at  Ravenna,  in  1237,  an  imperial  law  condemning 
all  heretics  to  death.^  The  kind  of  death  was  not  indi- 
cated.   But  every  one  knew  that  the  common  German  cus- 

1  "Statuimus  in  primis,  ut  crimen  hoereseos  et  damnatae  sectae  cujuslibet, 
quocumque  nomine  censeantur  sectatores  (prout  veteribus  legibus  est  in- 
dictum)  inter  publica  crimina  numerentur:  immo  crimine  laesas  majestatis 
nostn-e  debet  ab  omnibus  horribilius  judicari,  quod  in  divinaj  majestatis 
injuriam  noscitur  attentatum,  quamvis  judicii  potestate  altcrum  alteri  non 
excellat.  Nam  sicuti  perduellionis  crimen  personas  adimit  damnatorum 
et  bona,  et  damnat  post  obitum  memoriam  defunctorum;  sic  et  in  prtedicto 
crimine,  quo  Patereni  notantur,  per  omnia  volumus  observari  .  .  .  Per 
officiales  nostros,  sicut  et  alios  malefactores,  inquiri  ac  inquisitione  notatos 
...  a  viris  ecclesiasticis  et  praelatis  examinari  jubemus.  Per  quos  si  inventi 
fuerint  a  fide  catholica  saltern  in  articulo  deviare  ac  .  .  .  in  erroris  concepta 
insania  perseverent,  praesentis  nostras  legis  edicto  damnatos,  mortem  pati 
.  .  .  decernimus  quam  affectant:  ut  vivi  in  conspectu  populi  comburantur, 
flammarum  commissi  judicio."  Constitut.  Sicil.,  i,  3,  in  Eymeric,  Directorium 
inquisitorum.  Appendix,  p.  14. 

2  "Ut  haeretici  .  .  .  ubicumque  per  imperium  dampnati  ab  Ecclesia  fuerint 
et  seculari  judicio  assignati,  animadversione  debita  puniantur.  Si  qui  de 
predictis,  postquam  fuerint  deprehensi  territu  mortis  redire  voluerint  ad 
agendam  pcenitentiam,  in  perpetuum  carcerem  detrudantur."  The  ani- 
madversione debita  is  explained  further  on  by  a  passage  taken  from  the  law  of 
the  Senator  of  Rome:  "Praeterea  quicumque  haeretici  reperti  fuerint  in  civi- 
tatibus,  opidis  seu  ahis  locis  imperii  per  inquisitores  ab  apostolica  sede  datos 
et  ahos  orthodox^  fidei  zelatores,  hii  qui  jurisdictionem  ibidem  habuerint 
ad  inquisitorum  et  aliorum  cathoHcorum  virorum  insinuationem  eos  capere 
teneantur  et  captos  arctius  custodire  donee  per  censuram  ecclesiasticam 
condempnatos  dampnabili  morte  perimant."  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv, 
vol.  ii,  p.  196.     Then  follows  a  comparison  with  the  rei  lescs  majestatis. 


THE    INQUISITION 


115 


torn  of  burning  heretics  at  the  stake  had  now  become  the 
law.^  For  by  three  previous  laws,  May  14,  1238,  June  26, 
1238,  and  February  22,  1239,  the  emperor  had  declared 
that  the  SiciHan  Code  and  the  law  of  Ravenna  were  bind- 
ing upon  all  his  subjects;  the  law  of  June  26,  1238,  merely 
promulgated  these  other  laws  throughout  the  kingdom  of 
Aries  and  Vienne.^  Henceforth  all  uncertainty  was  at 
an  end.  The  legal  punishment  for  heretics  throughout 
the  empire  was  death  at  the  stake. 

Gregory  IX  did  not  wait  for  these  laws  to  be  enacted 
to  carry  out  his  intentions. 

As  early  as  1231  he  tried  to  have  the  cities  of  Italy 
and  Germany  adopt  the  civil  and  canonical  laws  in  vogue 
at  Rome  against  heresy,  and  he  was  the  first  to  inaugurate 
that  particular  method  of  prosecution,  the  permanent 
tribunal  of  the  Inquisition. 

We  possess  some  of  the  letters  which  he  wrote  in  June, 
1 23 1,  urging  the  bishops  and  archbishops  to  further  his 
plans. ^     He  did  not  meet  with  much  success,  however, 

1  The  most  ancient  book  on  German  customs,  the  Sachsenspiegd,  written 
probably  a  Httle  before  1235  (cf.  Hansische  Geschichtsbldtter,  1876,  pp.  102, 
103),  condemns  (ii,  13,  sect.  7)  heretics  to  the  stake:  "Swilch  cristen  man 
ungeloubic  ist  oder  mit  zcoubere  umme  get  oder  mit  vergifnisse,  unde  des 
verwunden  wirt,  den  sal  man  uf  der  hurt  burnen."  Sachenspiegel,  ed. 
Weiske  et  Hildebrand,  1877,  p.  47. 

2  Cf.  these  imperial  laws  in  the  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  pp. 
281-284.     Cf.  for  more  details,  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  223. 

3  For  the  letters  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Salsburg,  cf.  Ficker,  0/?.  cit.,  p.  204. 
There  is  also  a  letter  to  the  Dominicans  of  Freisach,  dated  November  27, 
1 23 1,  pubHshed  in  the  Acta  imperii  of  Winkelmann,  and  another  to  Conrad 


ii6  THE   INQUISITION 

although  the  Dominicans  and  the  Friars  Minor  did  their 
best  to  help  him.  Still  some  cities  like  Milan,  Verona,  Pia- 
cenza  and  Vercelli  adopted  the  measures  of  persecution 
which  he  proposed.  At  Milan,  Peter  of  Verona,  a  Domin- 
ican, on  September  1 5,  1233,  had  the  laws  of  the  Pope  and 
the  Senator  of  Rome  inscribed  in  the  city's  statutes.^  The 
animadversio  dehita  was  henceforth  interpreted  to  mean 
the  penalty  of  the  stake.  "  In  this  year,"  writes  a  chron- 
icler of  the  time,  "the  people  of  Milan  began  to  burn 
heretics."  ^  In  the  month  of  July,  sixty  heretics  were 
sent  to  the  stake  at  Verona.^  The  podesta  of  Piacenza 
sent  to  the  Pope  the  heretics  he  had  arrested."*  Vercelli, 
at  the  instance  of  the  Franciscan,  Henry  of  Milan,  in- 
corporated in  1233  into  its  statutes  the  law  of  the  Senator 

of  Marburg,  October  ii,  1231,  in  Kuchenbecker,  Analccta  Hassiaca,  vol.  iii, 
p.  73.  For  further  details  concerning  these  documents,  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.^ 
pp.  213,  214. 

1  Corio,  Uistoria  di  Milano,  ed.  Vinegia,  1554,  fol.  96;  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit., 
pp.  210,  211. 

2  "Mediolanenses  incipierunt  comburere  ereticos."  Memories  Medio- 
lanenses,  ad  ann.  1233,  in  the  Man.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xviii,  p.  402.  (The 
chronicler  is  ignorant  of  what  happened  at  Milan  in  1034.)  The  podesta 
Oldrado  de  Tresseno  of  Lodi,  who  governed  Milan  in  1233,  and  who  pre- 
sided over  the  executions  of  heretics,  recorded  the  facts  in  an  inscription  on 
his  statue,  which  can  still  be  read  on  the  facade  of  the  Palazzo  della  Ragione 
in  Milan: 

Atria  qui  grandis  solii  regalia  scandis, 
Praesidis  hie  memores  Oldradi  semper  honores, 
Civis  Laudensis,  fidei  tutoris  et  ensis. 
Qui  solium  struxit,  Catharos,  ut  debuit,  uxit. 

3  Cf.  Parisius  de  Cereta,  Man.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xix,  p.  8,  and  Maurisius  in 
Muratori,  Rer.  Ital.  SS.,  vol.  xiii,  p.  38. 

*  Annal.  Placent.,  in  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xviii,  p.  454. 


THE   INQUISITION  117 

of  Rome  and  the  imperial  law  of  1224;  it,  however,  omitted 
in  the  last  named  law  the  clause  which  decreed  the  penalty 
of  cutting  out  the  tongue.^  In  Germany,  the  Dominican, 
Conrad  of  Marburg  was  particularly  active,  in  virtue  of 
his  commission  from  Gregory  IX.  In  accordance  with 
the  imperial  law,  we  fmd  him  sentencing  to  the  stake  a 
great  number  of  heretics.^ 

It  may  be  admitted,  however,  that  in  his  excessive 
zeal  he  even  went  beyond  the  desires  of  the  sovereign 
pontiff.  Gregory  IX  did  not  fmd  everywhere  so  marked 
an  eagerness  to  carry  out  his  wishes.  A  number  of  the 
cities  of  Italy  for  a  long  time  continued  to  punish  obsti- 
nate heretics  according  to  the  penal  code  of  Innocent  III, 
i.e.  by  banishment  and  confiscation.^ 

That  the  penalty  of  the  stake  was  used  at  this  time  in 
France  is  proved  by  the  burning  of  one  hundred  and 
eighty-three  Bulgarians  or  Bugres  at  Mont-Wimer  in 
1239,^  and  by  two  important  documents,  the  Etahlisse- 

1  Cf.  Corio,  Uistoria  di  Milano,  loc.  cit.  For  further  details  regarding 
upper  Italy,  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  pp.  210,  211. 

2  The  papal  letter  of  October  11,  1231,  says:  "Quatenxis  prelatis,  dero  et 
populo  convocatis  generalem  facialis  predicationem  .  .  .  et  adjunctis  vobis 
discretis  aUquibus  ad  haec  sollicitius  exsequenda,  dihgenti  perquiratis  sollici- 
tudine  de  haereticis  et  etiam  infamatis,  et  si  quos  culpabiles  et  infamatos 
inveneritis,  nisi  examinati  velint  absolute  mandatis  Ecclesiae  obedire,  pro- 
cedatis  contra  eos  juxta  statuta  nostra  contra  haereticos  noviter  promulgata." 
Kirchenbecker,  Analecta  Hassiaca,  vol.  iii,  p.  73.  We  will  relate  further  on 
how  Conrad  understood  his  mission  of  Inquisitor,  and  how  he  fulfilled  it. 

3Cf.  on  this  point,  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  224. 

^Aubri  de  Trois-Fontaines,  ad  ann.  1239,  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii, 
pp.  944,  945.     For  other  references  to  this  fact,  cf.  Julien  Havet,  op.  cit., 


ii8  THE   INQUISITION 

ments  de  Saint  Louis  and  the  Coutumes  de  Beau- 
vaisis. 

"As  soon  as  the  ecclesiastical  judge  has  discovered, 
after  due  examination,  that  the  suspect  is  a  heretic,  he 
must  hand  him  over  to  the  secular  arm;  and  the  secular 
judge  must  send  him  to  the  stake."  ^  Beaumanoir  says 
the  same  thing:  "In  such  a  case,  the  secular  court  must 
aid  the  Church;  for  when  the  Church  condemns  any  one 
as  a  heretic,  she  is  obliged  to  hand  him  over  to  the  secular 
arm  to  be  sent  to  the  stake;  for  she  herself  cannot  put 
any  one  to  death."  ^ 

It  is  a  question  whether  this  legislation  is  merely  the 
codification  of  the  custom  introduced  by  popular  uprisings 
against  heresy  and  by  certain  royal  decrees,  or  whether 
it  owes  its  origin  to  the  law  of  Frederic  1 1  which  Gregory 
IX  tried  to  enforce  in  France,  as  he  had  done  in  Germany 
and  Italy.  This  second  hypothesis  is  hardly  probable. 
The  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition  did  not  have  to  import 
into  France  the  penalty  of  the  stake;  they  found  it  already 
established  in  both  central  and  northern  France. 

In  fact,  Gregory  IX  urged  everywhere  the  enforcement 
of  the  existing  laws  against  heresy,  and  where  none  existed 
he  introduced  a  very  severe  system  of  prosecution.    He  was 

p.  171,  n.  2.  Mont-Wimer  or  Mont-Aime  is  situated  in  Marne,  a  commune 
of  Bergeres-les-Vertus. 

^  Etablissements  de  saint  Louis,  ch.  cxxiii;  cf.  ch.  Ixxxv;  in  the  Ordonnances 
des  roys  de  France,  vol.  i,  pp.  211,  175. 

?  CPUtumes  de  Beat(,yaisis,  xi,  2;  cf.  xxx,  11,  ed  Beugnot,  vol.  i,  pp.  157,  413. 


THE    INQUISITION  119 

the  first,  moreover,  to  establish  an  extraordinary  and  per- 
manent tribunal  for  heresy  trials  —  an  institution  which 
afterwards  became  known  as  the  monastic  Inquisition. 

The  prosecution  and  the  punishment  of  heretics  in  every 
diocese  was  one  of  the  chief  duties  of  the  bishops,  the 
natural  defenders  of  orthodoxy.  While  heresy  appeared 
at  occasional  intervals,  they  had  little  or  no  difficulty  in 
fulfilling  their  duty.  But  when  the  Cathari  and  the 
Patarins  had  sprung  up  everywhere,  especially  in  southern 
Italy  and  France  and  northern  Spain,  the  secrecy  of 
their  movements  made  the  task  of  the  bishops  extremely 
hard  and  complicated.  Rome  soon  perceived  that  they 
were  not  very  zealous  in  prosecuting  heresy.  To  put 
an  end  to  this  neglect,  Lucius  III  jointly  with  the  emperor 
Frederic  Barbarossa  and  the  bishops  of  his  court  enacted 
a  decretal  at  Verona  in  1184,  regulating  the  episcopal 
inquisition. 

All  bishops  and  archbishops  were  commanded  to  visit 
personally  once  or  twice  a  year,  or  to  empower  their  arch- 
deacons or  other  clerics  to  visit  every  parish  in  which 
heresy  was  thought  to  exist.  They  were  to  compel  two 
or  three  trustworthy  men,  or,  if  need  be,  all  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  city,  to  swear  that  they  would  denounce 
every  suspect  who  attended  secret  assemblies,  or  whose 
manner  of  living  differed  from  that  of  the  ordinary  Catho- 
lic.    After  the  bishop  had  questioned  all  who  had  been 


120  THE   INQUISITION 

brought  before  his  tribunal,  he  was  empowered  to  punish 
them  as  he  deemed  fit,  unless  the  accused  succeeded  in 
establishing  their  innocence.  All  who  superstitiously  re- 
fused to  take  the  required  oath  (we  have  seen  how  the 
Cathari  considered  it  criminal  to  take  an  oath)  were  to 
be  condemned  and  punished  as  heretics,  and  if  they  re- 
fused to  abjure  they  were  handed  over  to  the  secular 
arm.i  jhjs  ^as  an  attempt  to  recall  the  bishops  to  a 
sense  of  their  duty.  The  Lateran  Council  of  121 5  re- 
enacted  the  laws  of  Lucius  III;  and  to  ensure  their  enforce- 
ment it  decreed  that  every  bishop  who  neglected  his  duty 
should  be  deposed,  and  another  consecrated  in  his  place.^ 
The  Council  of  Narbonne  in  1227  likewise  ordered  the 
bishops  to  appoint  synodal  witnesses  {testes  synodales) 
in  every  parish  to  prosecute  heretics,^  But  all  these 
decrees,  although  properly  countersigned  and  placed  in 
the  archives,  remained  practically  a  dead  letter.  In  the 
first  place  it  was  very  difficult  to  obtain  the  synodal  wit- 
nesses. And  again,  as  a  contemporary  bishop,  Lucas  de 
Tuy,  assures  us,  the  bishops  for  the  most  part  were  not  at 
all  anxious  to  prosecute  heresy.  When  reproached  for 
their  inaction  they  replied:  "How  can  we  condemn  those 
who  are  neither  convicted  nor  confessed?"  ^ 

1  Lucius  III,  Ep.  clxxi,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cci,  col.  1297  and  seq. 

2  The  Bull  Excommunicamus,  Decretals,  cap.  xiii,  in  fine,  De  hcereticis, 
lib.  V,  tit.  vii. 

3  Can.  14,  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  xi,  pars  i,  col.  307,  308. 

4  Lucas  Tudensis,  De  altera  vita  fideique  controversiis  adversus  Albigensium 


THE   INQUISITION  121 

The  Popes,  as  the  rulers  of  Christendom,  tried  to  make 
up  for  the  indifference  of  the  bishops  by  sending  their 
legates  to  hunt  for  the  Cathari  in  their  most  hidden 
retreats.  But  they  soon  realized  that  this  legatine 
inquisition  was  ineffective.^ 

"Bishop  and  legate,"  writes  Lea,  "were  alike  unequal 
to  the  task  of  discovering  those  who  carefully  shrouded 
themselves  under  the  cloak  of  the  most  orthodox  observ- 
ance; and  when  by  chance  a  nest  of  heretics  was  brought 
to  light,  the  learning  and  skill  of  the  average  Ordinary 
failed  to  elicit  a  confession  from  those  who  professed  the 
most  entire  accord  with  the  teachings  of  Rome.  In  the 
absence  of  overt  acts,  it  was  difficult  to  reach  the  secret 
thoughts  of  the  sectary.  Trained  experts  were  needed 
whose  sole  business  it  should  be  to  unearth  the  offenders, 
and  extort  a  confession  of  their  guilt."  ^ 

At  an  opportune  moment,  therefore,  two  mendicant 
orders,  the  Dominicans  and  the  Franciscans,  were  instituted 
to  meet  the  new  needs  of  the  Church.  Both  orders 
devoted  themselves  to  preaching;  the  Dominicans  were 
especially  learned  in  the  ecclesiastical  sciences,  i.e.  canon 
law  and  theology. 

''The  establishment  of  these  orders,"  continues  Lea, 
"seemed  a  providential  interposition  to  supply  the  Church 

errores,  cap.  xix,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum,  4  ed.,  vol.  iv,  col.  575-714.     Lucas 
was  Bishop  of  Tuy  in  GaHcia,  from  1239  to  1249. 

1  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  315  and  seq. 

2  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  318. 


122  THE   INQUISITION 

of  Christ  with  what  it  most  sorely  needed.  As  the  neces- 
sity grew  apparent  of  special  and  permanent  tribunals, 
devoted  exclusively  to  the  widespread  sin  of  heresy,  there 
was  every  reason  why  they  should  be  wholly  free  from 
the  local  jealousies  and  enmities  which  might  tend  to  the 
prejudice  of  the  innocent,  or  the  local  favoritism  which 
might  connive  at  the  escape  of  the  guilty.  If,  in  addition 
to  this  freedom  from  local  partialities,  the  examiners  and 
judges  were  men  specially  trained  to  the  detection  and 
conversion  of  the  heretics;  if  also,  they  had  by  irrevocable 
vows  renounced  the  world;  if  they  could  acquire  no  wealth, 
and  were  dead  to  the  enticement  of  pleasure,  every  guaran- 
tee seemed  to  be  afforded  that  their  momentous  duties 
would  be  fulfilled  with  the  strictest  justice  —  that  while 
the  purity  of  the  faith  would  be  protected,  there  would 
be  no  unnecessary  oppression  or  cruelty  or  persecution 
dictated  by  private  interests  and  personal  revenge.  Their 
unlimited  popularity  was  also  a  warrant  that  they  would 
receive  far  more  efficient  assistance  in  their  arduous 
labors  than  could  be  expected  by  the  bishops,  whose 
position  was  generally  that  of  antagonism  to  their  flocks, 
and  to  the  petty  seigneurs  and  powerful  barons  whose 
aid  was  indispensable.^ 

Gregory  IX  fully  understood  the  help  that  the  Domini- 
cans and  Franciscans  could  render  him  as  agents  of  the 
Inquisition  throughout  Christendom.^ 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  pp.  318,  319. 

2  Of  course  these  religions  were  to  render  other  services  to  the  church- 


THE    INQUISITION  123 

It  is  probable  that  the  Senator  of  Rome  refers  to  them 
in  his  oath  in  1231,  when  he  speaks  of  the  Inquisitores 
datos  ah  Ecclesia}  Frederic  II,  in  his  law  of  1232,  also 
mentions  the  Inquisitores  ah  apostolica  sede  datos?  The 
Dominican  Alberic  traveled  through  Lombardy  in  Novem- 
ber, 1232,  with  the  title  of  Inquisitor  hcereticce  pravitatis? 
In  1 23 1  a  similar  commission  was  entrusted  to  the  Domini- 
cans of  Freisach,  and  to  the  famous  Conrad  of  Marburg.^ 
Finally,  to  quote  but  one  more  instance,  Gregory  IX,  in 
1233,  wrote  an  eloquent  letter  to  the  bishops  of  southern 
France  in  which  he  said:  "We,  seeing  you  engrossed  in 
the  whirlwind  of  cares,  and  scarce  able  to  breathe  in  the 
pressure  of  overwhelming  anxieties,  think  it  well  to 
divide  your  burdens,  that  they  may  be  more  easily  borne. 
We  have  therefore  determined  to  send  preaching  friars 
against  the  heretics  of  France  and  the  adjoining  provinces, 
and  we  beg,  warn,  and  exhort  you,  ordering  you  as  you 
reverence  the  Holy  See,  to  receive  them  kindly,  and  to 
treat  them  well,  giving  them  in  this  as  in  all  else,  favor, 
counsel,  and  aid,  that  they  may  fulfill  their  office."  ^ 

Their  duties  are  outlined  in  a  letter  of  Gregory  IX  to 

1  Raynaldi,  Annates,  ad  ann.  1231,  sect.  16,  17;  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.   205. 

2  Cap.  iii,  in  the  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  196. 

3  Potthast,  Regesta  Roman.  Ponti}.,  no.  904,  i. 

^Cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  213;  cf.  Potthast,  n.  S859,  8860. 

sPotthast,  no.  9143-9152.  At  the  same  time,  Gregory  IX  sent  a  bull  "to 
the  Priors  and  Friars  of  the  Order  of  Preachers."  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  p.  329 
and  seq.  Robert  le  Bougre  was  appointed  inquisitor  for  northern  France, 
April  19,  1233.     Ripoll,  Bullarium,  vol.  i,  p.  45. 


,24  THE   INQUISITION 

Conrad  of  Marburg,  October  ii,  1231:  "When  you 
arrive  in  a  city,  summon  the  bishops,  clergy,  and  people, 
and  preach  a  solemn  sermon  on  faith;  then  select  certain 
men  of  good  repute  to  help  you  in  trying  the  heretics 
and  suspects  denounced  before  your  tribunal.  All  who  on 
examination  are  found  guilty  or  suspected  of  heresy  must 
promise  to  absolutely  obey  the  commands  of  the  Church; 
if  they  refuse,  you  must  prosecute  them,  according  to  the 
statutes  which  we  have  recently  promulgated."  ^  We  have 
in  these  instructions  all  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition: 
the  time  of  grace;  the  call  for  witnesses  and  their  testi- 
mony; the  interrogation  of  the  accused;  the  reconciliation 
of  repentant  heretics;  the  condemnation  of  obdurate 
heretics. 

Each  detail  of  this  procedure  calls  for  a  few  words  of 
explanation. 

The  Inquisitor  first  summoned  every  heretic  of  the 
city  to  appear  before  him  within  a  certain  fixed  time, 
which  as  a  rule  did  not  exceed  thirty  days.  This  period 
was  called  "the  time  of  grace"  (tempus  gratice)?  The 
heretics  who  abjured  during  this  period  were  treated  with 
leniency.     If  secret  heretics,  they  were  dismissed  with 

1  Kuchenbecker,  Analecta  Hassiaca,  vol.  iii,  p.  73;  cf.  Ficker,  op.  cit., 
p.  213.  Similar  instructions  may  be  found  in  the  Processus  inquisitionis 
(Appendix  A). 

2  "Quod  et  tempus  gratia  sive  indulgentiae  appellamus."  Processus 
Inquisitionis,  cf.  Appendix  A.  "Assignato  eis  termino  competenti  quod 
tempus  graticB  vocare  soletis."  Consultation  of  the  Archbishop  of  Narbonne, 
at  the  Council  of  Beziers  in  1246,  c.  ii.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  330,  note  2. 


THE   INQUISITION  125 

only  a  slight  secret  penance;  if  public  heretics,  they  were 
exempted  from  the  penalties  of  death  and  life-imprison- 
ment, and  sentenced  either  to  make  a  short  pilgrimage, 
or  to  undergo  one  of  the  ordinary  canonical  penances.^ 
If  the  heretics  failed  to  come  forward  of  theirown  accord, 
they  were  to  be  denounced  by  the  Catholic  people.  At 
first  the  number  of  witnesses  required  to  make  an  accusa- 
tion valid  was  not  determined;  later  on  two  were  declared 
necessary. 2  In  the  beginning,  the  Inquisition  could  only 
accept  the  testimony  of  men  and  women  of  good  repute; 
and  the  Church  for  a  long  time  maintained  that  no  one 
should  be  admitted  as  an  accuser  who  was  a  heretic,  was 
excommunicated,  a  homicide,  a  thief,  a  sorcerer,  a  diviner, 
or  a  bearer  of  false  witness.^  But  her  hatred  of  heresy 
led  her  later  on  to  set  aside  this  law,  when  the  faith  was 


1  "Illis  autem  qui  ad  mandatum  Ecclesiae  venerint,  non  imponetur  publica 
poenitentia,  nisi  sint  publici  haerctici  .  .  .  cum  quibus  etiam  ita  misericordia 
fiat  quod  non  condempnentur  ad  mortem,  non  ad  carcerem  perpetuum,  non 
ad  peregrinationem  nimis  longam,  sed  aliae  poenitentiae  injungantur  quas  pro 
qualitate  delicti  inquisitores  viderint  imponendas."  Consultation  of  the 
cardinal  Bishop  of  Albano,  in  Doat,  vol.  xxxi,  fol.  5.  On  the  acts  of  this 
cardinal,  who  was  none  other  than  Pierre  de  Colmieu,  the  old  Archbishop  of 
Rouen,  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  144,  145. 

2  G.  Durand,  Speculum  judtciorum,  Hb.  i,  parts  iv,  De  teste,  sect.  11. 
Gui  Foucois  (who  became  Pope  under  the  name  of  Clement  I\')  thought  that 
more  than  two  witnesses  were  helpful,  and  in  some  cases  absolutely  necessary." 
"Ideoque  non  crederem  tutum  ad  vocem  duorum  testium  hominem  bonae 
opinionis  damnare,  licet  videar  contra  jus  dicere."  Consultation  in  Doat, 
vol.  xxxvi,  quest,  xv.  Cf.  Eymeric,  Directorium,  3^  pars,  De  testium  multi- 
plicatione,  p.  445. 

3Pseudo-Julii,  Ep.  ii,  cap.  17;  Gratian,  Decretum,  pars  2^,  Causa  v, 
quaest.  iii,  cap.  v. 


126  THE    INQUISITION 

in  question.  As  early  as  the  twelfth  century,  Gratian 
had  declared  that  the  testimony  of  infamous  and  heret- 
ical witnesses  might  be  accepted  in  trials  for  heresy.^ 

The  edicts  of  Frederic  II  declared  that  heretics  could 
not  testify  in  the  courts,  but  this  disability  was  removed 
when  they  were  called  upon  to  testify  against  other  sus- 
pects.2  In  the  beginning,  the  Inquisitors  were  loath  to 
accept  such  testimony.  But  in  1261  Alexander  IV 
assured  them  that  it  was  lawful  to  do  so.^  Henceforth 
the  testimony  of  a  heretic  was  considered  valid,  al- 
though it  was  always  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  In- 
quisition to  reject  it  at  will.  This  principle  was  finally 
incorporated  into  the  canon  law,  and  was  enforced  by 
constant  practice.''  All  legal  exceptions  were  henceforth 
declared  inoperative  except  that  of  moral  enmity.^ 

Witnesses  for  the  defence  rarely  presented  themselves. 
Very  seldom  do  we  come  across  any  mention  of  them.*' 


1  Pars  ii,  Causa  ii,  quaest.  vii,  cap.  xxii;  Causa  vi,  quaest.  i,  cap.  xix. 

2  Historia  diplomatica  Frederici  II,  vol.  iv,  pp.  299,  300.  Frederic  re- 
enacted  at  Ravenna,  February  22,  1232,  the  law  of  1220  against  heretics, 
with  the  additional  clause:  "Adjicimus  quod  hasreticus  convinci  per  hasreticum 
possit." 

^  Bull  Consuluit,  of  January  23,  1261,  in  Eymeric,  Directorium  inquisitor um. 
Appendix,  p.  40. 

^  Cap.  V,  In  fidei  favor  em.  Sexto  v,  2;  Eymeric,  Directorium  inquisitor  um, 
p.  105. 

s  Eymeric,  ihid.,  3^  pars,  quaest.  Ixvii,  pp.  606,  607.  Pegna,  ihid.,  pp.  607, 
609,  declares  that  great  cruelty  or  even  insulting  words  —  v.g.  to  call  a 
man  cornutus  or  a  woman  meretrix  —  might  come  under  the  head  of  enmity, 
and  invalidate  a  man's  testimony. 

^  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  445,  447. 


THE    INQUISITION  127 

This  is  readily  understood,  for  they  would  almost  inevi- 
tably have  been  suspected  as  accomplices  and  abettors 
of  heresy.  For  the  same  reason,  the  accused  were  prac- 
tically denied  the  help  of  counsel.  Innocent  III  had  for- 
bidden advocates  and  scriveners  to  lend  aid  or  counsel 
to  heretics  and  their  abettors.^  This  prohibition,  which 
in  the  mind  of  the  Pope  was  intended  only  for  defiant  and 
acknowledged  heretics,  was  gradually  extended  to  every 
suspect  who  was  striving  to  prove  his  innocence. ^ 

Heretics  or  suspects,  therefore,  denounced  to  the  In- 
quisition generally  found  themselves  without  counsel 
before  their  judges. 

They  personally  had  to  answer  the  various  charges  of 
the  indictment  (capitula)  made  against  them.  It  certainly 
would  have  been  a  great  help  to  them,  to  have  known 
the  names  of  their  accusers.  But  the  fear  —  well-founded 
it  was  true  ^  —  that  the  accused  or  their  friends  would 

1  Decretals,  cap.  xi,  De  JicBreticis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii. 

-  Eymeric,  Directorium  inquisitor  urn,  3^  pars,  quaest.  xxxix,  p.  565;  cf. 
446;  Lea,  op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  444.  Sometimes,  however,  the  accused  was  granted 
counsel,  but  juxta  juris  jormam  ac  stylum  et  usum  officii  Inqicisitionis;  cf. 
Vidal,  Le  tribunal  d' Inquisition,  in  the  Annates  de  Saint-Louis  des  Frangais, 
vol.  ix  (1905),  p.  299,  note.  Eymeric  himself  grants  one  (Directorium,  pp. 
451-453).  But  this  lawyer  was  merely  to  persuade  his  client  to  confess  his 
heresy;  he  was  rather  the  lawyer  of  the  court  than  of  the  accused.  Vidal, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  302,  303.  Pegna,  however,  says  (in  Eymeric,  Directorium  2^  pars, 
ch.  xi,  Comm.  10)  that  in  his  time  the  accused  was  allowed  counsel,  if  he 
were  only  suspected  of  heresy.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  400,  401. 

3  Guillem  Pelhisse  tells  us  that  the  Cathari  sometimes  killed  those  who 
had  denounced  their  brethren.  " Pcrsecutores  eorum  percutiebant,  vulnerabant 
et  occidebant,"  Chronique,  ed.  Douais,  p.  90.  A  certain  Arnold  Dominici, 
who  had  denounced  seven  heretics,  was  killed  at  night  in  his  bed  by  "the 


128  THE   INQUISITION 

revenge  themselves  on  their  accusers,  induced  the  In- 
quisitors to  withhold  the  names  of  the  witnesses.^  The 
only  way  in  which  the  prisoner  could  invalidate  the  testi- 
mony against  him  was  to  name  all  his  mortal  enemies. 
If  his  accusers  happened  to  be  among  them,  their  testi- 
mony was  thrown  out  of  court.^  But  otherwise,  he  was 
obliged  to  prove  the  falsity  of  the  accusation  against  him 
—  a  practically  impossible  undertaking.  For  if  two  wit- 
nesses, considered  of  good  repute  by  the  Inquisitor,  agreed 
in  accusing  the  prisoner,  his  fate  was  at  once  settled;^ 
whether  he  confessed  or  not,  he  was  declared  a  heretic. 

Believers."  Ibid.,  pp.  98,  99.  As  early  as  1229,  the  papal  legate,  after  his 
investigation  in  the  South,  brought  back  all  the  testimony  with  him  to  Rome, 
"ne  forte  si  aliquando  inventa  fuisset  (inquisitio)  in  terra  ista  a  malevolis, 
in  mortem  testium  qui  contra  tales  deposuerant  redundaret,"  and  even  this  did 
not  prevent  the  heretics  from  killing  the  accusers  of  their  brethren:  "nam  et 
sola  suspicione,  post  recessum  ipsius  legati,  fuere  tales  aliqui  et  persecutores 
haereticorum  plurimi  interfecti."  C.  de  Puy-Laurens,  Chronique,  cap.  40. 
Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  438;  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  390. 

1  Eymeric,  Directorium,  3^  pars,  q.  72;  An  nomina  testium  et  denuntia- 
torum  sint  delatis  piiblicanda,  p.  627.  The  law  on  this  point  varied  from 
time  to  time.  But  between  the  years  1244  and  1254  a  manual  of  the  Inqui- 
sition {Processus  inqiiisitionis,  cf.  Appendix  A)  says:  "Neque  a  juris  ordine 
deviamus  nisi  quod  testium  non  publicamus  nomina  propter  ordinationem 
sedis  apostolicae  sub  domino  Gregorio  (IX)  provide  factam  et  ab  Innocentio 
(IV)  postmodum  innovatam."  Cf.  bull  of  Alexander  IV,  Layettes  du  tresor 
des  Chartes,  vol.  iii,  n.  4221.  When  Boniface  VIII  incorporated  into  the 
canon  law  the  rule  of  withholding  the  names  of  witnesses,  he  expressly  said 
that  they  might  be  produced,  if  there  was  no  danger  in  doing  so.  Cap.  20, 
Sexto  V,  2.  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  p.  438  and  note;  Vidal,  Le  tribunal  d* Inquisition 
de  Pamiers  in  the  Annales  de  Saint  Louis  des  Frangais,  vol.  ix,  pp.  294,  295. 

2  Eymeric,  Directorium,  3'   pars,  De  defensionibus  reorum,  p.  446  and  seq. 

3  According  to  the  Processus  inquisitionis  the  rule  was:  "Ad  nullius  con- 
dempnationem  sine  lucidis  et  apertis  probationibus  vel  confessione  propria 
processimus."     Appendix  A.     Cf.  Eymeric,  De  duodecimo  modo  terminando 


THE   INQUISITION  129 

After  the  prisoner  had  been  found  guilty,  he  could 
choose  one  of  two  things;  he  could  abjure  his  heresy  and 
manifest  his  repentance  by  accepting  the  penance  im- 
posed by  his  judge,  or  he  could  obstinately  persist  either 
in  his  denial  or  profession  of  heresy,  accepting  resolutely 
all  the  consequences  of  such  an  attitude. 

If  the  heretic  abjured,  he  knelt  before  the  Inquisitor 
as  a  pentitent  before  his  confessor.  He  had  no  reason  to 
fear  his  judge.  For,  properly  speaking,  he  did  not  inflict 
punishment. 

''The  mission  of  the  Inquisition,"  writes  Lea,  "was  to 
save  men's  souls;  to  recall  them  to  the  way  of  salvation, 
and  to  assign  salutary  penance  to  those  who  sought  it, 
like  a  father-confessor  with  his  penitent.  Its  sentences, 
therefore,  were  not  like  those  of  an  earthly  judge,  the 
retaliation  of  society  on  the  wrong-doer,  or  deterrent 
examples  to  prevent  the  spread  of  crime;  they  were  simply 
imposed  for  the  benefit  of  the  erring  soul,  to  wash  away 
its  sin.  The  Inquisitors  themselves  habitually  speak  of 
their  ministrations  in  this  sense."  ^ 

But  "the  sin  of  heresy  was  too  grave  to  be  expiated 
simply  by  contrition  and  amendment."  ^  The  Inquisitor, 
therefore,  pointed  out  other  means  of  expiation:  "The 
penances  customarily  imposed  by  the   Inquisition  were 

processusm  fidei  per  condempnationem  convicti  de  haresi  et  persistentis  in 
negativa,  in  the  Directorium,  3*  pars,  pp.  521-525. 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  p.  459. 

3  Lea,  ibid.,  p.  463. 
10 


,30  THE   INQUISITION 

comparatively  few  in  number.  They  consisted,  firstly, 
of  pious  observances  —  recitation  of  prayers,  frequenting 
of  churches,  the  discipline,  fasting,  pilgrimages,  and  fines 
nominally  for  pious  uses,  —  such  as  a  confessor  might 
impose  on  his  ordinary  penitents.  These  were  for  offences 
of  trifling  import.  ''Next  in  grade  are  the  poencE  con- 
jusihiles,  —  the  humiliating  and  degrading  penances,  of 
which  the  most  important  was  the  wearing  of  yellow 
crosses  sewed  upon  the  garments;  and  finally,  the  severest 
punishment  among  those  strictly  within  the  competence 
of  the  Holy  Office,  the  mums  or  prison."  ^ 

If  the  heretic  refused  to  abjure,  his  obduracy  put  an 
end  to  the  judge's  leniency,  and  withdrew  him  at  once 
from  his  jurisdiction. 

"The  Inquisitor  never  condemned  to  death,  but  merely 
withdrew  the  protection  of  the  Church  from  the  hardened 
and  impenitent  sinner  who  afforded  no  hope  of  conver- 
sion, or  from  him  who  showed  by  relapse  that  there  was 
no  trust  to  be  placed  in  his  pretended  repentance."  ^ 

It  was  at  this  juncture  that  the  State  intervened.  The 
ecclesiastical  judge  handed  over  the  heretic  to  the  secular 
arm,^  which  simply  enforced  the  legal  penalty  of  the  stake. 

1  Lea,  ibid.,  p.  462.     For  further  details  about  these  penances,  ibid.,  p.  463 
and  seq.;  cf.  Ch.  Molinier,  U Inquisition  dans  le  midi  de  la  France  au  XIII 
et  au  XIV^  siecles,  pp.  358-398. 

2  Lea,  ibid.,  p.  460. 

3  "Quia  sacrosancta  Romana  Ecclesia  non  habet  amplius  quod  faciat 
contra  te,  pro  tuis  demeritis  in  hiis  scriptis  te  relinquimus  curiae  seculari." 


THE   INQUISITION  131 

However,  the  law  allowed  the  heretic  to  abjure  even  at 
the  foot  of  the  stake;  in  that  case  his  sentence  was  com- 
muted to  life  imprisonment.^ 

It  is  hard  to  conceive  of  a  greater  responsibility  than 
that  of  a  mediaeval  Inquisitor.  The  life  or  death  of  the 
heretic  was  practically  at  his  disposal.  The  Church,  there- 
fore, required  him  to  possess  in  a  pre-eminent  degree  the 
qualities  of  an  impartial  judge.  Bernard  Gui,  the  most 
experienced  Inquisitor  of  his  time  (1308- 1323),  thus  paints 
for  us  the  portrait  of  the  ideal  Inquisitor:  "He  should 
be  diligent  and  fervent  in  his  zeal  for  religious  truth,  for 
the  salvation  of  souls,  and  for  the  destruction  of  heresy. 
He  should  always  be  calm  in  times  of  trial  and  difficulty, 
and  never  give  way  to  outbursts  of  anger  or  temper.  He 
should  be  a  brave  man,  ready  to  face  death  if  necessary, 
but  while  never  cowardly  running  from  danger,  he  should 
never  be  foolhardy  in  rushing  into  it.  He  should  be  un- 
moved by  the  entreaties  or  the  bribes  of  those  who  appear 
before  his  tribunal;  still  he  must  not  harden  his  heart  to 
the  point  of  refusing  to  delay  or  mitigate  punishment, 
as  circumstances  may  require  from  time  to  time. 

Liher  sententiarum  inquisitionis  Tholosanct  ah  anno  Ch.  1307  ad  ann.  1323, 
in  Limborch,  Historia  Inquisiiionis,  Amsterdam,  1692,  p.  gi. 

1  "Si  qui  .  .  .  territu  mortis  redire  voluerint  ad  agendam  poenitentiam,  in 
perpetuum  carcerem  detrudantur."  Constitution  of  Frederic  (1232)  quoted 
above;  cf.  the  Council  of  Toulouse  (1229)  and  the  text  of  Gregory  IX.  For 
heretics  converted  at  the  foot  of  the  stake,  cf.  Eymeric,  op.  cit.,  f-  pars,  De 
decimo  modo  terminandi  processum  fidei  per  condemnationem  hcsretici  impami- 
tentis  non  relapsi,  p.  515. 


132  THE   INQUISITION 

In  doubtful  cases,  he  should  be  very  careful  not  to  be- 
lieve too  easily  what  may  appear  probable,  and  yet  in 
reality  is  false;  nor  on  the  other  hand  should  he  stub- 
bornly refuse  to  believe  what  may  appear  improbable, 
and  yet  is  frequently  true.  He  should  zealously  discuss 
and  examine  every  case,  so  as  to  be  sure  to  make  a  just 
decision.  .  .  .  Let  the  love  of  truth  and  mercy,  the 
special  qualities  of  every  good  judge,  shine  in  his  coun- 
tenance, and  let  his  sentences  never  be  prompted  by 
avarice  or  cruelty.* 

This  portrait  corresponds  to  the  idea  that  Gregory  IX 
had  of  the  true  Inquisitor.  In  the  instructions  which  he 
gave  to  the  terrible  Conrad  of  Marburg,  October  21,  1223, 
he  took  good  care  to  warn  him  to  be  prudent  as  well  as 
zealous:  "Punish  if  you  will,"  he  said,  "the  wicked  and 
perverse,  but  see  that  no  innocent  person  suffers  at  your 
hands":  ut  puniatur  sic  temeritas  perversorum,  quod  inno- 
centice  puriias  non  Icedaiur.^  Gregory  IX  cannot  be 
accused  of  injustice,  but  he  will  ever  be  remembered  as 
the  Pope  who  established  the  Inquisition  as  a  permanent 
tribunal,  and  did  his  utmost  to  enforce  everywhere  the 
death  penalty  for  heresy. 

^  Practica  Inquisitionis,  pars  6^  ed.  Douais,  1886,  pp.  231-233.  Eymeric 
gives  a  similar  portrait  of  the  ideal  Inquisitor.  Directorum,  3^  pars,  qusst. 
I,  De  Conditione  Inquisitionis,  p.  534;  cf.  qucest,  xvi,  De  conditionibus  vicarii 
inquisitoris,  p.  547.  The  Inquisitor  had  to  be  forty  years  old:  ibid., 
P-  535-  This  was  fixed  by  Clement  V,  Clementinarum,  lib.  v,  tit.  iii,  cap. 
i--iii. 

2  Quoted  by  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  p.  220. 


THE    INQUISITION  133 

This  Pope  was,  in  certain  respects,  a  very  slave  to  the 
letter  of  the  law.  The  protests  of  St.  Augustine  and 
many  other  early  Fathers  did  not  affect  him  in  the  least. 
In  the  beginning  while  he  was  legate,  he  merely  insisted 
upon  the  enforcement  of  the  penal  code  of  Innocent  III, 
which  did  not  decree  any  punishment  severer  than  banish- 
ment, but  he  soon  began  to  regard  heresy  as  a  crime 
similar  to  treason,  and  therefore  subject  to  the  same 
penalty,  death.  Certain  ecclesiastics  of  his  court  with 
extremely  logical  minds,  and  rulers  like  Pedro  II  of  Aragon 
and  Frederic  II,  had  reached  the  same  conclusion,  even 
before  he  did.  Finally,  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  pontificate, 
and  undoubtedly  after  mature  deliberation,  he  decided 
to  compel  the  princes  and  the  podesta  to  enforce  the  law 
condemning  heretics  to  the  stake. 

He  did  his  utmost  to  bring  this  about.  He  did  not 
forget,  however,  that  the  Church  could  not  concern  her- 
self in  sentences  of  death.  In  fact,  his  law  of  123 1 
decrees  that:  "Heretics  condemned  by  the  church  are 
to  be  handed  over  to  the  secular  courts  to  receive  due 
punishment  {animadversio  dehita)."  ^  The  emperor  Fred- 
eric II  had  the  same  notion  of  the  distinction  between 
the  two  powers.  His  law  of  1224  points  out  carefully 
that  heretics  convicted  by  an  ecclesiastical  trial  are 
to  be  burned  in  the  name  of  the  civil  authority:  auc- 

^"Dampnati  vero  per  Ecclesiam  seculari  judicio  relinquantur,  animad- 
versione  debita  puniendi."     Decretales,  cap,  xv,  De  Hareticis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii. 


134  THE   INQUISITION 

toritate  nostra  ignis  judicio  concremandus}  The  imperial 
law  of  1232  likewise  declares  that  heretics  condemned 
by  the  Church  are  to  be  brought  before  a  secular  tribunal 
to  receive  the  punishment  they  deserve.^  This  explains 
why  Gregory  IX  did  not  believe  that  in  handing  over  here- 
tics to  the  secular  arm  he  participated  directly  or  indirectly 
in  a  death  sentence.^    The  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition 

^  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  126. 

2"Hceretici  .  .  .  ubicumque  per  imperium  dampnati  ab  Ecclesia  fuerint  et 
seculari  judicio  assignati,  animadversione  debita  puniantur."  Ibid.,  p.  196. 
The  Sicilian  constitution  of  1233  decrees  that  all  who  have  been  declared 
impenitent  heretics,  prceseniis  nostrcs  legis  edicto  damimtos,  tnorlcm  pati 
decernimus.     In  Eymeric,  Directorium,  Appendix,  p.  15. 

3  Lea  writes  {op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  p.  536,  note):  "  Gregory  IX  had  no  scruple  in 
asserting  the  duty  of  the  church  to  shed  the  blood  of  heretics."  In  a  brief  of 
1234  to  the  Archbishop  of  Sens,  he  says:  Nee  eniin  decuit  Apostolicam  Sedem, 
in  oculis  siiis  cum  Madianita  ccsunte  JudcBo,  manum  suam  a  sanguine  pro- 
hibere,  ne  si  secus  ageret  non  custodire  populum  Israel  .  .  .  viderctur.  Ripoll, 
i,  66.  This  is  certainly  a  serious  charge,  but  the  citation  he  gives  implies 
something  altogether  different.  Lea  has  been  deceived  himself,  and  in  turn 
has  misled  his  readers,  by  a  comparison  which  he  mistook  for  a  doctrinal 
document.  The  context,  we  think,  clearly  shows  that  the  Pope  was  making 
a  comparison  between  the  Holy  See  and  the  Jewish  leader  Phinees,  who  had 
slain  an  Israelite  and  a  harlot  of  Madian,  in  the  very  act  of  their  crime  (Num. 
XXV.  6,  7).  That  does  not  imply  that  the  church  uses  the  same  weapons. 
Even  if  the  comparison  is  not  a  very  happy  one,  still  we  must  not  exaggerate 
its  import.  We  quote  the  rest  of  the  papal  letter,  so  that  our  readers  may 
see  that  it  did  not  treat  of  the  execution  of  heretics  at  all.  "Fratribus  ordinis 
Praedicatorum  habentibus  zelum  Dei  et  in  opere  potentibus  Apostolica  scripta 
direximus,  ut  ad  caput  hujusmodi  reptilium  conterendum,  vulpes  parvulas 
capiendas  et  maxillas  eorum,  qui  Christi  Ecclesiam  lacerebant,  in  freno  cohi- 
bendas  et  camo,  potentes  assurgerent,  et  oves  errantes  ad  ovile  suis  humeris 
reportarent  nee  non  personas  infectas  scabra  rubigine  vetustatis  lima  suae 
praedicationis  eraderent,  ut  mundae  in  sanctuarium  Domini  et  caslestem 
patriam  introirent;  nee  enim  decuit  apostolicam  sedem,  in  oculis  suis  cum 
Madianita  coeunte  Judaeo,  manum  suam  a  sanguine  prohibere  (the  weapons 
used  by  the  Holy  See  are  simply  the  Scripta  apostolica,  cited  above),  ne  si 


THE    INQUISITION  135 

which  he  established  in  no  way  modified  this  concept  of 
ecclesiastical  justice.  The  Papacy,  the  guardian  of  or- 
thodoxy for  the  universal  Church,  simply  found  that 
the  Dominicans  and  the  Franciscans  were  more  docile 
instruments  than  the  episcopate  for  the  suppression  of 
heresy.  But  whether  the  Inquisition  was  under  the 
direction  of  the  bishops  or  the  monks,  it  could  have  been 
conducted  on  the  same  lines. 

But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  unfortunately  changed  com- 
pletely under  the  direction  of  the  monks.  The  change 
effected  by  them  in  the  ecclesiastical  procedure  resulted 
wholly  to  the  detriment  of  the  accused.  The  safeguards 
for  their  defense  were  in  part  done  away  with.  A  pre- 
tense was  made  to  satisfy  the  demands  of  justice  by 
requiring  that  the  Inquisitors  be  prudent  and  impartial 
judges.  But  this  made  everything  depend  upon  indi- 
viduals, whereas  the  law  itself  should  have  been  just  and 
impartial.  In  this  respect,  the  criminal  procedure  of  the 
Inquisition  is  markedly  inferior  to  the  criminal  procedure 
of  the  Middle  Ages. 

secus  ageret  non  custodire  populum  Israel,  nee  super  grege  suo  noctis  vigilias 
vigilare,  sed  dormire  seu  dormitare  potius  videretur.  Porro  nee  fuit  man- 
dantis  intentio,  nee  scribentis  voluntas  hoc  habuit,  ut  super  aliis  Provinciis, 
prEeterquam  de  hseresi  infamatis  ad  eos  scripta  hujusmodi  emanarent  .  .  . 
Mandamus  .  .  .  contra  haereticos  hujusmodi  studeatis  solicite  debitum  Pas- 
toralis  officii  exercere,  et  eos  reconciliare  Domino  .  .  ."  Ripoll,  Bullarium  ord. 
FF.  Pradkatorum,  vdl.  i,  p.  66. 


CHAPTER    VII 
SIXTH   PERIOD 

Development  of  the  Inquisition 
Innocent  IV  and  the  Use  of  Torture 

The  successors  of  Gregory  IX  were  not  long  in  perceiv- 
ing certain  defects  in  the  system  of  the  Inquisition.  They 
tried  their  best  to  remedy  them,  although  their  efforts 
were  not  always  directed  with  the  view  of  mitigating  its 
rigor.  We  will  indicate  briefly  their  various  decrees 
pertaining  to  the  tribunals,  the  penalties  and  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  Inquisition. 

In  appointing  the  Dominicans  and  the  Franciscans  to 
suppress  heresy,  Gregory  IX  did  not  dream  of  abolishing 
the  episcopal  Inquisition.  This  was  still  occasionally 
carried  on  with  its  rival,  whose  procedure  it  finally 
adopted.  Indeed  no  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition  could 
operate  in  a  diocese  without  the  permission  of  the 
Bishop,  whom  it  was  supposed  to  aid.^  But  it  was 
inevitable  that  the  Inquisitors  would  in  time  encroach 
upon  the  episcopal  authority,  and    relying    upon   their 

iLea,  op,  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  330  seq. 
136 


THE    INQUISITION  137 

papal  commission  proceed  to  act  as  independent  judges. 
This  abuse  frequently  attracted  the  attention  of  the 
Popes,  who,  after  some  hesitation,  finally  settled  the  law 
on  this  point. 

"If  previous  orders  requiring  it"  (episcopal  concur- 
rence), writes  Lea,  "had  not  been  treated  with  contempt. 
Innocent  IV  would  not  have  been  obliged,  in  1254,  to 
reiterate  the  instructions  that  no  condemnations  to  death 
or  life  imprisonment  should  be  uttered  without  consulting 
the  Bishops;  and  in  1255  he  enjoined  Bishop  and  In- 
quisitor to  interpret  in  consultation  any  obscurities  in 
the  laws  against  heresy,  and  to  administer  the  lighter 
penalties  of  deprivation  of  office  and  preferment.  This 
recognition  of  episcopal  jurisdiction  was  annulled  by 
Alexander  IV,  who,  after  some  vacillation,  in  1257  ren- 
dered the  Inquisition  independent  by  releasing  it  from 
the  necessity  of  consulting  with  the  Bishops  even  in 
cases  of  obstinate  and  confessed  heretics,  and  this  he 
repeated  in  1260.  Then  there  was  a  reaction.  In  1262, 
Urban  IV,  in  an  elaborate  code  of  instructions,  formally 
revived  the  consultation  in  all  cases  involving  the  death 
penalty  or  perpetual  imprisonment;  and  this  was  repeated 
by  Clement  IV  in  1265.  Either  these  instructions,  how- 
ever, were  revoked  in  some  subsequent  enactment,  or  they 
soon  fell  into  desuetude,  for  in  1273,  Gregory  X,  after 
alluding  to  the  action  of  Alexander  IV  in  annulling  con- 
sultation, proceeds  to  direct  that  Inquisitors  in  deciding 


,38  THE   INQUISITION 

upon  sentences  shall  proceed  in  accordance  with  the 
counsel  of  the  Bishops  or  their  delegates,  so  that  the 
episcopal  authority  might  share  in  decisions  of  such 
moment."  ^ 

This  decretal  remained  henceforth  the  law.  But  as 
the  Inquisitors  at  times  seemed  to  act  as  if  it  did  not  exist, 
Boniface  VI II  and  Clement  IV  strengthened  it  by  declar- 
ing null  and  void  all  grave  sentences  in  which  the  Bishop 
had  not  been  consulted.^  The  consultation,  however, 
between  the  Bishop  and  Inquisitor  could  be  conducted 
through  delegates.^  In  insisting  upon  this,  the  Popes 
proved  that  they  were  anxious  to  give  the  sentences 
of  the  Inquisition  every  possible  guarantee  of  perfect 
justice. 

Another  way  in  which  the  Popes  labored  to  render  the 
sentences  of  the  Inquisition  just  was  the  institution  of 
experts.  As  the  questions  which  arose  before  the  tri- 
bunals in  matters  of  heresy  were  often  very  complex, 
"it  was  soon  found  requisite  to  associate  with  the  In- 
quisitors in  the  rendering  of  sentences  men  versed  in 
the  civil  and  canon  law,  which  had  by  this  time  become 
an  intricate  study  requiring  the  devotion  of  a  lifetime. 
Accordingly  they  were  empowered  to  call  in  experts  to 

1  Ibid.,  p.  335.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  413-416. 

^  Sexto,  lib.  V,  tit  ii,  cap.  17,  Per  hoc;  Clementin;  lib.  v,  tit.  iii,  cap.  if 
Multorum  querela. 

3  The  Decretal  Multorum  querela;  Eymeric,  Dircctorium,  p.  112.  Often 
the  Bishop  and  the  Inquisitor  named  the  one  delegate.         "• 


THE   INQUISITION  139 

deliberate  with  them  over  the  evidence,  and  advise  with 
them  on  the  sentence  to  be  rendered."  ^ 

The  official  records  of  the  sentences  of  the  Inquisition 
frequently  mention  the  presence  of  these  experts,  perttisind 
honi  viri.^  Their  number,  which  varied  according  to 
circumstances,  was  generally  large.  At  a  consultation 
called  by  the  Inquisitors  in  January,  1329,  at  the  Bishop's 
palace  in  Pamiers,  there  were  thirty-five  present,  nine  of 
whom  were  jurisconsults;  and  at  another  in  September* 
1329,  there  were  fifty-one  present,  twenty  of  whom  were 
civil  lawyers.^ 

"At  a  comparatively  early  date,  the  practice  was 
adopted  of  allowing  a  number  of  culprits  to  accumulate 
whose  fate  was  determined  and  announced  in  a  solemn 
Sermo  or  auto  de  fe.  .  .  .  In  the  final  shape  which  the 
assembly  of  counsellors  assumed,  we  find  it  summoned 
to  meet  on  Fridays,  the  Sermo  always  taking  place  on 
Sundays.  When  the  number  of  criminals  was  large, 
there  was  not  much  time  for  deliberation  in  special  cases. 
The  assessors  were  always  to  be  jurists  and  Mendicant 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  388.  Cf.  The  Bull  of  Innocent  IV,  July  11,  1254. 
Layettes  du  Tresor  des  Charles,  vol.  iii,  no.  41  n  (cf-  4113)-  Alexander  IV 
calls  them  experts,  per  Hi,  in  his  bull  of  April  15,  1255,  Potthast,  Regesta,  no. 
15,  804;  Registers  edited  by  De  la  Ronciere,  no.  372;  Alexander  renewed  his 
decree  in  a  bull  of  April  27,  1260,  CoU.  Doat,  xxx,  fol.  204;  cf.  also  Urban  IV, 
Bull  of  August  2,  1264. 

2  Douais,  La  Formule;  communicato  honorum  virorum  consilio  des  sentences 
inquisitoriales,  in  the  Congres  scientifique  international  des  Catholiques  (section 
of  Sciences  historiques),  Fribourg  (Switzerland),  1898,  pp.  316-367. 

^Ihid.,  p.  323. 


,40  THE   INQUISITION 

Friars,  selected  by  the  Inquisitor  in  such  numbers  as  he 
saw  fit.  They  were  severally  sworn  on  the  Gospels  to 
secrecy,  and  to  give  good  and  wise  counsel,  each  one 
according  to  his  conscience,  and  to  the  knowledge  vouch- 
safed him  by  God.  The  Inquisitor  then  read  over  his  sum- 
mary of  each  case,  sometimes  withholding  the  name  of  the 
accused,  and  they  voted  the  sentence  "  Penance  at  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  Inquisitor"  —  "that  person  is  to  be  impris- 
oned, or  abandoned  totheseculararm"— while  the  Gospels 
lay  on  the  table  "so  that  our  judgment  might  come  from 
the  face  of  God,  and  our  eyes  might  see  justice."  ' 

We  have  here  the  beginnings  of  our  modern  jury.  As  a 
rule,  the  Inquisitors  followed  the  advice  of  their  counsellors, 
save  when  they  themselves  favored  a  less  severe  sen- 
tence.2  The  labor  of  these  experts  was  considerable,  and 
often  lasted  several  days.  "A  brief  summary  of  each 
case  was  submitted  to  them.  Eymeric  maintained  that 
the  whole  case  ought  to  be  submitted  to  them;  and  that 
was  undoubtedly  the  common  practice.  But  Pegna  on 
the  other  hand  thought  it  was  better  to  withhold  from 
the  assessors  the  names  of  both  the  witnesses  and  the 
prisoners.  He  declares  that  this  was  the  common  prac- 
tice of  the  Inquisition,  at  least  as  far  as  the  names  were 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  389;  Doat,  vol.  xxvii,  fol.  108.  The  Sermones  of 
the  Inquisitor  Bernard  of  Caux  were  not  always  held  on  Sundays  (Tanon, 
op.  cit.,  p.  425). 

2  Douais,  La  jormule:  Communicato  bonorum  virorum  consilio,  loc.  cit., 

PP-  324,  326. 


THE   INQUISITION  141 

concerned.^  This  was  also  the  practice  of  the  Inquisitors 
of  southern  France,  as  Bernard  Gui  tells  us.  The  ma- 
jority of  the  counsellors  received  a  brief  summary  of  the 
case,  the  names  being  withheld.  Only  a  very  few  of  them 
were  deemed  worthy  to  read  the  full  text  of  all  the  in- 
terrogatories." ^ 

We  can  readily  see  how  the  periti  or  honi  viri,  who 
were  called  upon  to  decide  the  guilt  or  innocence  of 
the  accused  from  evidence  considered  in  the  abstract, 
without  any  knowledge  of  the  prisoners'  names  or  motives, 
could  easily  make  mistakes.  In  fact,  they  did  not  have 
data  enough  to  enable  them  to  decide  a  concrete  case. 
For  tribunals  are  to  judge  criminals  and  not  crimes,  just 
as  physicians  treat  sick  people  and  not  diseases  in  the  ab- 
stract. We  know  that  the  same  disease  calls  for  different 
treatment  in  different  individuals;  in  like  mannei*  a  crime 
must  be  judged  with  due  reference  to  the  mentality  of 

1  Eymeric,  Directorium,  3^  pars,  quest.  80,  Comm.  129,  p.  632. 

2  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  421.  "Ante  sermonem  vero,  captato  tempore  oppor- 
tune, petitur  per  inquisitores  consilium  a  praedictis  (bonis  viris),  facta  prius 
extractione  summaria  et  compendiosa  de  culpis,  in  quo  complete  tangitur 
substantia  cujuslibet  personce  .  .  .  sine  expressione  nominis  alicujus  persons 
ad  cauielam,  ut  liherius  de  posnitentm  pro  tali  culpa  imponenda  sine  affectione 
personcB  judicent  consulentes.  Solidius  tamen  consilium,  si  omnia  complete 
exprimerentur,  quod  faciendum  est  ubi  et  quando  possunt  haberi  persons 
consulentes  quibus  non  est  periculum  revelare;  esset  etiam  minus  calump- 
niosum.  Sed  ta?nen  non  jiiit  usus  inquisilonis  ah  antiquo,  propter  periculum 
jam  przetactum;  verumptamen  confessiones  singulorum  prius  integraliter 
explicantur  coram  doycesano  vel  ejus  vicario,  aliquibus  peritis  paucis  et  sec- 
retariis  et  juratis."  Bernard  Gui,  Practica,  3^  pars,  p.  83.  On  the  com- 
munication of  the  names,  cf.  a  bull  of  Alexander  IV.  Layettes  du  tresor 
des  Charles,  vol.  iii,  no.  4221. 


142  THE   INQUISITION 

the  one  who  has  committed  it.    The  Inquisition  did  not 
seem  to  understand  this.^ 

The  assembly  of  experts,  therefore,  instituted  by  the 
Popes  did  not  obtain  the  good  results  that  were  expected. 
But  we  must  at  least  in  justice  admit  that  the  Popes  did 
their  utmost  to  protect  the  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition 
from  the  arbitrary  action  of  individual  judges,  by  re- 
quiring the  Inquisitors  to  consult  both  the  boni  viri  and 
the  Bishops. 

Over  the  various  penalties  of  the  Inquisition  the  Popes 
likewise  exercised  a  supervision,  which  was  always  just 
and  at  times  most  kindly. 

The  greatest  penalties  which  the  Inquisition  could 
inflict  were  life  imprisonment,  and  abandonment  of  the 
prisoner  to  the  secular  arm.  It  is  only  with  regard  to 
the  first  of  these  penalties  that  we  see  the  clemency  of 
both  Popes  and  Councils.  Anyone  who  considers  the 
rough  manners  of  this  period,  must  admit  that  the 
Church  did  a  great  deal  to  mitigate  the  excessive  cruelty 
of  the  mediaeval  prisons. 

The  Council  of  Toulouse,  in  1229,  decreed  that  re- 
pentant heretics  "must  be  imprisoned,  in  such  a  way 
that  they  could  not  corrupt  others."  ^      it  also  declared 

1  Even  in  our  day  the  jury  is  bound  to  decide  on  the  merits  of  the  case 
submitted  to  it,  without  regarding  the  consequences  of  its  verdict.  The 
foreman  reminds  the  jurymen  in  advance  that  "they  will  be  false  to  their 
oath  if,  in  giving  their  decision,  they  are  biased  by  the  consideration  of  the 
punishment  their  verdict  will  entail  upon  the  prisoner." 

2  "Ad  agendam  poenitentiam  ...  in  muro  tali  includantur  cautela  quod 


THE   INQUISITION  143 

that  the  Bishop  was  to  provide  for  the  prisoners'  needs 
out  of  their  confiscated  property.  Such  measures  be- 
token an  earnest  desire  to  safeguard  the  health,  and  to  a 
certain  degree  the  liberty  of  the  prisoners.  In  fact,  the 
documents  we  possess  prove  that  the  condemned  some- 
times enjoyed  a  great  deal  of  freedom,  and  were  allowed 
to  receive  from  their  friends  an  additional  supply  of  food, 
even  when  the  prison  fare  was  ample. ^ 

But  in  many  places  the  prisoners,  even  before  their 
trial,  were  treated  with  great  cruelty.  "The  papal  or- 
ders were  that  they  (the  prisons)  should  be  constructed 
of  small,  dark  cells  for  solitary  confinement,  only  taking 
care  that  the  enormis  rigor  of  the  incarceration  should 
not  extinguish  life."  ^  But  this  last  provision  was  not 
always  carried  out.  Too  often  the  prisoners  were  con- 
fined in  narrow  cells  full  of  disease,  and  totally  unfit  for 
human  habitation."  The  Popes,  learning  this  sad  state  of 
affairs,  tried  to  remedy  it.    Clement  V  was  particularly 

> 

facultatem  non  habeant  alios  corrumpendi."  D'Achery,  Spicilegium,  in-fol. 
vol.  i,  p.  711. 

1  Cf.  on  this  point  Vidal.,  op.  at.,  in  Annales  de  Saint-Louis  des  Fran^ais, 
1905,  PP-  361-368. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  491. 

3  "In  aliis  domunculis  sunt  miseri  commorantes  in  compedibus  tarn 
ligneis  quam  ferreis,  nee  se  movere  possunt,  sed  subtus  se  egerunt  atque 
mingunt  nee  jacere  possunt  nisi  resupini  in  terra  frigida;  et  in  hujusmodi 
tormentis  nocte  dieque  longis  temporibus  quotidie  perseverant.  In  aliis  vero 
carcerum  locis  degentibus,  non  solum  lux  et  aer  subtrahitur,  sed  et  victus 
excepto  pane  doloris  et  aqua,  quae  etiam  rarissime  ministratur."  Document 
quoted  by  Vidal,  op.  cit.,  1905,  p.  362,  note.  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  491, 
492. 


144  THE   INQUISITION 

zealous  in  his  attempts  at  prison  reform.*  That  he  suc- 
ceeded in  bettering,  at  least  for  a  time,  the  lot  of  these 
unfortunates,  in  whom  he  interested  himself,  cannot  be 
denied.^ 

If  the  reforms  he  decreed  were  not  all  carried  out,  the 
blame  must  be  laid  to  the  door  of  those  appointed  to 
enforce  them.     History  frees  him  from  all  responsibility. 

The  part  played  by  the  Popes,  the  Councils,  and  the 
Inquisitors  in  the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  does  not 
appear  in  so  favorable  a  light.  While  not  directly  par- 
ticipating in  the  death  sentences,  they  were  still  very 
eager  for  the  execution  of  the  heretics  they  abandoned  to 
the  secular  arm.  This  is  well  attested  by  both  docu- 
ments and  facts. 

Lucius  III,  at  the  Council  of  Verona  in  1184, 
ordered  sovereigns  to  swear,  in  the  presence  of  their 
Bishops,  to  execute  fully  and  conscientiously  the  eccle- 
siastical and  civil  laws  against  heresy.  If  they  re- 
fused or  neglected    to  do    this,   they    themselves    were 

1  He  ordered  that  the  prisons  be  kept  in  good  condition,  that  they  be 
looked  after  by  both  Bishop  and  Inquisitor,  each  of  whom  was  to  appoint 
a  jailer  who  would  keep  the  prison  keys,  that  all  provisions  sent  to  the  pris- 
oners should  be  faithfully  given  them,  etc.  Cf.  Decretal  Multorum  querela 
in  Eymeric,  Directorium,  p.  112. 

2  His  legates  Pierre  de  la  Chapelle  and  Beranger  de  Fredol  visited  in 
April,  1306,  the  prisons  of  Carcasconne  and  Albi,  changed  the  jailers,  removed 
the  irons  from  the  prisoners,  and  made  others  leave  the  subterraneous  cells  in 
which  they  had  been  confined.  Doat,  vol.  xxxiv,  fol.  4  and  seq;  Douais, 
Documents,  vol.  ii,  p.  304  seq.  Cf.  Compayre,  Etudes  historiques  sur  VAlbi- 
geois,  pp.  240-245. 


THE   INQUISITION  145 

liable  to  excommunication  and  their  rebellious  cities  to 
interdict.^ 

Innocent  IV,  in  1252,  enacted  a  law  still  more  severe, 
insisting  on  the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon 
heretics.  "When,"  he  says,  "heretics  condemned  by  the 
Bishop,  his  Vicar,  or  the  Inquisitors,  have  been  aban- 
doned to  the  secular  arm,  the  podesta  or  ruler  of  the  city 
must  take  charge  of  them  at  once,  and  within  five  days 
enforce  the  laws  against  them."  ^ 

This  law,  or  rather  the  bull  Ad  Extirpanda,  which  con- 
tains it,  was  to  be  inscribed  in  perpetuity  in  all  the  local 
statute  books.  Any  attempt  to  modify  it  was  a  crime, 
which  condemned  the  offender  to  perpetual  infamy,  and 
a  fme  enforced  by  the  ban.  Moreover,  each  podesta,  at 
the  beginning  and  end  of  his  term,  was  required  to  have 
this  bull  read  in  all  places  designated  by  the  Bishop  and 
the  Inquisitors,  and  to  erase  from  the  statute  books  all 
laws  to  the  contrary.^ 

At  the  same  time.  Innocent  IV  issued  instructions  to 

i"Eis  excummunicatione  ligandis  et  terris  ipsorum  interdicto  Ecclesiae 
supponendis.  Civitas  autem  quae  his  institutis  duxerit  resistendum  vel  .  .  . 
punire  neglexerit  .  .  .  ,  aliarum  caraet  commercio  civitatum,"  etc.  Decretal 
Ad  abolendam,  in  the  Decretals,  cap,  ix,  de  Hareticis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii.  Cf. 
Sexto,  lib.  V,  tit.  ii,  c.  2.  Ut  Officium;  Council  of  Aries,  1254,  can.  iii;  Coun- 
cil of  Beziers,  1246,  can.  ix. 

2"Damnatos  de  haeresi  .  .  .  potestas  vel  rector  .  .  .  eos  sibi  relictos  re- 
cipiat  statim,  vel  infra  quinque  dies  ad  minus,  circa  eos  constitutiones  contra 
tales  editas  servaturus."  Bull  Ad  extirpanda,  May  15,  1252,  in  Eymeric, 
Directorium,  Appendix,  p.  8. 

3  Ibid. 

II 


,46  THE   INQUISITION 

the  Inquisitors  of  upper  Italy,  urging  them  to  have  this 
bull  and  the  edicts  of  Frederic  II  inserted  in  the  statutes 
of  the  various  cities.^  And  to  prevent  mistakes  being 
made  as  to  which  imperial  edicts  he  wished  enforced, 
he  repeated  these  instructions  in  1254,  and  inserted  in 
one  of  his  bulls  the  cruel  laws  of  Frederic  II,  viz.: 
the  edict  of  Ravenna,  Commissis  nobis,  which  decreed 
the  death  of  obdurate  heretics;  and  the  Sicilian  law,  In- 
consutilem  iunicam,  which  expressly  decreed  that  such 
heretics  be  sent  to  the  stake.^ 

These  decrees  remained  the  law  as  long  as  the  Inquisition 
lasted.  The  bull  Ad  Exiirpanda  was,  however,  slightly 
modified  from  time  to  time.  "  In  1265,  Clement  IV  again 
went  over  it,  carefully  making  some  changes,  principally 
in  adding  the  word  'Inquisitors  '  in  passages  where  Inno- 
cent had  only  designated  the  Bishops  and  Friars,  thus 
showing  that  the  Inquisition  had,  during  the  interval, 
established  itself  as  the  recognized  instrumentality  in 
the  prosecution  of  heresy,  and  the  next  year  he  repeated 
Innocent's  emphatic  order  to  the  Inquisitors  to  enforce 
the  insertion  of  his  legislation  and  that  of  his  predecessors 
upon  the  statute  books  everywhere,  with  the  free  use  of 
excommunication  and  interdict."  ^ 

1  Cf.  the  bulls  Cum  adversus,  Tunc  potissime,  Ex  Commissis  nobis,  etc.,  in 
Eymeric,  ibid.,  pp.  9-12. 

^Ibid.,  pp.  13-15. 

3  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  339;  cf.  Potthast,  Regesta,  nos.  19348,  19423,  19428, 
19433.  19522,  19896,  19905. 


THE   INQUISITION  147 

A  little  later,  Nicholas  IV,  who  during  his  short  pon- 
tificate (1288- 1 292),  greatly  favored  the  Inquisition  in  its 
work,  re-enacted  the  bulls  of  Innocent  IV  and  Clement  IV, 
and  ordered  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  of  Frederic  II, 
lest  perchance  they  might  fall  into  desuetude.^ 

It  is  therefore  proved  beyond  question  that  the  Church, 
in  the  person  of  the  Popes,  used  every  means  at  her  dis- 
posal, especially  excommunication,  to  compel  the  State 
to  enforce  the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon  heretics. 
This  excommunication,  moreover,  was  all  the  more 
dreaded,  because,  according  to  the  canons,  the  one  ex- 
communicated, unless  absolved  from  the  censure,  was 
regarded  as  a  heretic  himself  within  a  year's  time,  and 
was  liable  therefore  to  the  death  penalty .^  The  princes 
of  the  day,  therefore,  had  no  other  way  of  escaping  this 
penalty,  except  by  faithfully  carrying  out  the  sentence 
of  the  Church. 

•  ••••••• 

The  Church  is  also  responsible  for  having  introduced 
torture  into  the  proceedings  of  the  Inquisition.  This 
cruel  practice  was  introduced  by  Innocent  IV  in  1252. 

^  Registers,  published  by  Langlois,  no.  4253.  For  the  interest  Nicholas  IV 
took  in  the  Inquisition,  cf.  Douais,  Monuments,  vol.  i,  pp.  xxx-xrri. 

2  Alexander  IV  decreed  this  penalty  against  the  contumacious,  Sexto,  De 
Hareticis,  cap.  vii.  Boniface  VIII  extended  it  to  those  princes  and  magistrates 
who  did  not  enforce  the  sentences  of  the  Inquisition:  quam  excommunica- 
tionem  si  per  annum  animo  sustinuerit  pertinaci,  extunc  velut  haereticus 
condemnetur.  Sexto,  De  Hareticis,  cap.  xviii  in  Eymeric,,  2^  pars,  p.  no. 
Cf.  ibid.,  2^  pars,  quest.  47,  pp.  360,  361. 


148  THE   INQUISITION 

Torture  had  left  too  terrible  an  impression  upon  the 
minds  of  the  early  Christians  to  permit  of  their  employing 
it  in  their  own  tribunals.  The  barbarians  who  founded 
the  commonwealths  of  Europe,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Visigoths,  knew  nothing  of  this  brutal  method  of  extorting 
confessions.  The  only  thing  of  the  kind  that  they  allowed 
was  flogging,  which,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  was 
rather  akin  to  the  correction  of  children  by  their  parents. 
Gratian,  who  recommends  it  in  his  Decretum,^  l^ys  it 
down  as  an  "accepted  rule  of  canon  law  that  no  confes- 
sion is  to  be  extorted  by  torture."  ^  Besides,  Nicholas  I, 
in  his  instructions  to  the  Bulgarians,  had  formally  de- 
nounced the  torturing  of  prisoners.^  He  advised  that  the 
testimony  of  three  persons  be  required  for  conviction; 

1  Causa  V,  quaest.  v,  Illi  qui,  cap.  iv;  Causa  xii,  quaest.  ii,  Fraternitas. 

2"Confessio  ergo  in  talibus  non  extorqueri  debet,  sed  potius  sponte  pro- 
fiteri.  Pessimum  est  enim  de  suspicione  aut  extorta  confessione  quemquam 
judicare,"  etc.  Causa  xv,  quaest.  vi,  cap.  i.  It  has  been  said  that  severe 
flogging  might  be  a  most  violent  form  of  torture.  Tanon  (op.  cit.,  pp.  371, 
372).     But  St.  Augustine  certainly  did  not  mean  this. 

3  "Si  fur  vel  latro  deprehensus  fuerit  et  negaverit  quod  ei  impingitur, 
asseritis  apud  vos  quod  judex  caput  ejus  verberibus  tundat  et  aliis  stimulis 
ferreis,  donee  veritatem  depromat,  ipsius  latera  pungat:  quam  rem  nee  divina 
lex,  nee  humana  prorsus  admittit,  cum  non  invita,  sed  spontanea  debeat  esse 
confessio;  nee  sit  violenter  elicienda,  sed  voluntarie  proferenda.  Denique,  si 
contigerit  vos,  etiam  illis  pasnis  illatis,  nihil  de  his  quae  passo  in  crimen  obji- 
ciuntur,  penitus  invenire,  nonne  saltem  nunc  erubescitis  et  quam  impie  judi- 
cetis  agnoscitis?  Similiter  autem  si  homo  criminatus,  taha  passus  sustinere 
non  valens  dixerit  se  perpetrasse  quod  non  perpetravit;  ad  quern,  rogo,  tants 
impietatis  magnitude  revolvitur,  nisi  ad  eum  qui  hunc  talia  cogit  mendaciter 
confiteri?  Quamvis  non  confiteri  noscatur  sed  loqui  hoc  ore  profert,  quod 
corde  non  tenet."  Responsa  ad  Consulta  Bulgarorum,  cap.  Ixxxvi,  Labbe, 
Concilia,  vol.  viii,  col.  544. 


THE    INQUISITION  149 

if  these  could  not  be  obtained,  the  prisoner's  oath  upon 
the  Gospels  was  to  be  considered  suificient. 

The  ecclesiastical  tribunals  borrowed  from  Germany 
another  method  of  proving  crime,  viz.,  the  ordeals,  or 
judgments  of  God. 

There  was  the  duel,  the  ordeal  of  the  cross,  the  ordeal 
of  boiling  water,  the  ordeal  of  fire,  and  the  ordeal  of  cold 
water.  They  had  a  great  vogue  in  nearly  all  the  Latin 
countries,  especially  in  Germany  and  France.  But  about 
the  twelfth  century  they  deservedly  fell  into  great  dis- 
favor, until  at  last  the  Popes,  particularly  Innocent  III, 
Honorius  III,  and  Gregory  IX,  legislated  them  out  of 
existence.^ 

At  the  very  moment  the  Popes  were  condemning  the 
ordeals,  the  revival  of  the  Roman  law  throughout  the 
West  Was  introducing  the  customs  of  antiquity.  It 
was  then  "that  jurists  began  to  feel  the  need  of  torture, 
and  accustom  themselves  to  the  idea  of  its  introduction. 
The  earliest  instances  with  which  I  have  met,"  writes 
Lea,  '* occur  in  the  Veronese  code  of  1228,  and  the  Sicilian 
constitutions  of  Frederic  II  in  1231,  and  in  both  of  these 
the  references  to  it  show  how  sparingly  and  hesitatingly 
it  was  employed.  Even  Frederic,  in  his  ruthless  edicts, 
from  1220  to  1239,  makes  no  allusion  to  it,  but  in  accord- 

1  Decretals,  lib.  v,  tit.  xxxv,  cap.  i-iii.  Cf.  Vacandard,  U&glise  et  les 
Ordalies  in  Etudes  de  critique  et  d'histoire,  3d  ed.,  Paris,  1906,  pp.  191-215. 
On  the  abuse  of  ordeals  in  trials  for  heresy,  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  303-312. 


,50  IHE   INQUISITION 

ance  with  the  Verona  decree  of  Ldcius  III,  prescribes  the 
recognized  form  of  canonical  purgation  for  the  trial  of 
all  suspected  heretics."  ^ 

The  use  of  torture,  as  Tanon  has  pointed  out,  had 
perhaps  never  been  altogether  discontinued.  Some 
ecclesiastical  tribunals,  at  least  in  Paris,  made  use  of  it 
in  extremely  grave  cases,  at  the  close  of  the  twelfth  and 
the  beginning  of  the  thirteenth  century.-  But  this  was 
exceptional;  in  Italy,  apparently,  it  had  never  been  used. 

Gregory  IX  ignored  all  references  to  torture  made  in  the 
Veronese  code,  and  the  constitutions  of  Frederic  II.  But 
Innocent  IV,  feeling  undoubtedly  that  it  was  a  quick 
and  effective  method  for  detecting  criminals,  authorized 
the  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition  to  employ  it.  In  his  bull 
Ad  Extirpanda,  he  says:  "The  podesta  or  ruler  (of  the 
city)  is  hereby  ordered  to  force  all  captured  heretics  to 
confess  and  accuse  their  accomplices  by  torture  which 
will  not  imperil  life  or  injure  limb,  just  as  thieves  and 
robbers  are  forced  to  accuse  their  accomplices  and  to 
confess  their  crimes;  for  these  heretics  are  true  thieves, 
murderers  of  souls,  and  robbers  of  the  sacraments  of 
God."  ^    The  Pope  here  tries  to  defend  the  use  of  torture, 


1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  421.  Cf.  Paul  Foumier,  Les  officialiies  au  moyen 
dge,  Paris,  1880,  pp.  249,  280;  Esmein,  Histoire  de  la  procedure  criminelle  en 
France,  Paris,  1882,  pp.  19,  77. 

2  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  362-373;  Notice  sur  le  Formulaire  de  Guillaume  de 
Paris,  1888,  p.  S3- 

3  "Teneatur  potestas  vel  rector  haereticos  .  .  .  cogere  citra  membri  diminu- 


THE   INQUISITION  151 

by  classing  heretics  with  thieves  and  murderers.  A  mere 
comparison  is  his  only  argument. 

This  law  of  Innocent  IV  was  renewed  and  confirmed 
November  30,  1259,  by  Alexander  IV/  and  again  on 
November  3,  1265,  by  Clement  IV.^  The  restriction  of 
Innocent  III  to  use  torture  "which  should  not  imperil 
life  or  injure  limb"  (Cogere  citra  memhri  diminutionem  et 
mortis  periculum),  left  a  great  deal  to  the  discretion  of 
the  Inquisitors.  Besides  flogging,  the  other  punish- 
ments inflicted  upon  those  who  refused  to  confess  the 
crime  of  which  they  were  accused  were  antecedent  im- 
prisonment, the  rack,  the  strappado,  and  the  burning 
coals.^ 

When  after  the  first  interrogatory  the  prisoner  denied 
what  the  Inquisitors  believed  to  be  very  probable  or 
certain,  he  was  thrown  into  prison.  The  durus  career 
et  arcta  vita*  was  deemed  an  excellent  method  of  extorting 
confessions. 

"It  was  pointed  out,"  says  Lea,  "that  judicious  re- 

tionem  et  mortis  periculum,  tanquam  vere  latrones  et  homicidas  animarum 
.  .  .  errores  suos  expresse  fateri."  Bull  Ad  extirpanda,  in  Eymeric,  Directo- 
rium.  Appendix,  p.  8. 

1  Potthast,  Regesta,  no.  17714- 

2  Ibid.,  no.  19433- 

3  Vidal  (Le  tribunal  d^ inquisition  de  Pamiers,  loc.  cit.,  i,  1905,  p.  286)  quotes 
also  the  torture  of  the  boots,  and  the  torture  of  water,  which  were  seldom 
used;  the  last  was  pecuUar  to  Spain.     Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  284-286. 

4  "Per  durum  carcerem  et  vitam  arctam  est  ab  eis  confessio  extorquenda." 
Document  of  1253  or  1254,  published  by  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  Ixvii. 
Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  360-362. 


,52  THE   INQUISITION 

striction  of  diet  not  only  reduced  the  body,  but  weakened 
the  will,  and  rendered  the  prisoner  less  able  to  resist  alter- 
nate threats  of  death  and  promises  of  mercy.  Starva- 
tion, in  fact,  was  reckoned  one  of  the  regular  and  most 
efficient  methods  to  subdue  unwilling  witnesses  and  de- 
fendants/' ^  This  was  the  usual  method  employed  in 
Languedoc.  "  It  is  the  only  method,"  writes  Mgr.  Douais,^ 
''to  extort  confessions  mentioned  either  in  the  records 
of  the  notary  of  the  Inquisition  of  Carcassonne  ^  or  in  the 
sentences  of  Bernard  Gui.^  It  was  also  the  practice  of 
the  Inquisitors  across  the  Rhine."  ^ 

Still  the  use  of  torture,  especially  of  the  rack  and  the 
strappado,  was  not  unknown  in  southern  Europe,  even 
before  the  promulgation  of  Innocent's  bull  Ad  Extirpanda.^ 

The  rack  was  a  triangular  frame,  on  which  the  prisoner 


1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  421. 

2  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  ccxl. 

3  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  ii,  p.  115  and  seq. 

^  Loc  cit.,  pp.  105,  114,  120,  145.  Mgr.  Douais  adds:  This  is  the  only 
method  of  extorting  confession  mentioned  by  Bernard  Gui  in  his  Practica. 
This  is  not  accurate.  We  will  see  later  on  that  the  Practica  also  recommends 
the  use  of  torture.  Mgr.  Douais  here  alludes  to  the  following  passage: 
"Quando  aliquis  vehementer  suspectus  .  .  .  persistat  in  negando  .  .  .  non 
est  aUqualiter  relaxandus,  sed  detinendus  per  annos  plurimos,  ut  vexatio  det 
intellectum."     Practica,  5^  pars,  ed.  Douais,  p.  302. 

5  "Si  autem  recuset  hoc  facere  (confiteri),  recludatur  in  carcere  et  incutiatur 
ei  timor  quod  testes  contra  ipsum  habeantur,  et  si  per  testes  convictus  fuerit, 
nulla  fiat  ei  misericordia  quin  morti  tradetur;  et  sustentetur  tenui  victu,  quia 
timor  talis  humiliabit  eum,"  etc.  David  d' Augsburg,  Tractatus  de  inqui- 
sitione  hereticorum,  ed.  Preger,  Mainz,  1878,  p.  43. 

^  Cf .  several  cases  in  Languedoc  a  little  before  1 243  in  Douais,  Documents, 
vol.  i,  p.  240. 


THE    INQUISITION  153 

was  stretched  and  bound,  so  that  he  could  not  move. 
Cords  were  attached  to  his  arms  and  legs,  and  then  con- 
nected with  a  windlass,  which  when  turned  dislocated  the 
joints  of  the  wrists  and  ankles. 

The  strappado  or  vertical  rack  was  no  less  painful. 
The  prisoner  with  his  hands  tied  behind  his  back  was 
raised  by  a  rope  attached  to  a  pulley  and  windlass  to 
the  top  of  a  gallows,  or  to  the  ceiling  of  the  torture  cham- 
ber; he  was  then  let  fall  with  a  jerk  to  within  a  few  inches 
of  the  ground.  This  was  repeated  several  times.  The 
cruel  torturers  sometimes  tied  weights  to  the  victim's 
feet  to  increase  the  shock  of  the  fall. 

The  punishment  of  burning,  "although  a  very  dan- 
gerous punishment,"  as  an  Inquisitor  informs  us,  was 
occasionally  used.  We  read  of  an  official  of  Poitiers,  who, 
following  a  Toulousain  custom,  tortured  a  sorceress  by 
placing  her  feet  on  burning  coals  (juxta  carbones  accensos)} 
This  punishment  is  described  by  Marsollier  in  his  His- 
toire  de  V Inquisition.  First  a  good  fire  was  started;  then 
the  victim  was  stretched  out  on  the  ground,  his  feet 
manacled,  and  turned  toward  the  flame.  Grease,  fat,  or 
some  other  combustible  substance  was  rubbed  upon  them, 
so  that  they  were  horribly  burned.  From  time  to  time 
a  screen  was  placed  between  the  victim's  feet  and  the 

i"De  concilio  quorumdam  proborum  qui  se  asserebant  vidisse  penis 
examinari  hcereticos  in  partibus  Tholosanis,  fecisti  plantas  pedum  ejusdem 
mulieris  juxta  carbones  accensos  apponi."  Letter  of  John  XXII,  July  28, 
13 19,  in  Vidal,  op.  cii.,  October,  1905,  p.  5. 


,54  THE   INQUISITION 

brazier,  that  the  Inquisitor  might  have  an  opportunity 
to  resume  his  interrogatory. 

Such  methods  of  torturing  the  accused  were  so  detest- 
able, that  in  the  beginning  the  torturer  was  always  a  civil 
official,  as  we  read  in  the  bull  of  Innocent  I V.^    The  canons 
of  the  Church,  moreover,  prohibited  all  ecclesiastics  from 
taking  part  in  these  tortures,  so  that  the  Inquisitor  who, 
for  whatever  reason,  accompanied  the  victim  into  the 
torture  chamber,  was    thereby    rendered   irregular,  and 
could  not  exercise  his  office  again,  until  he  had  obtained 
the   necessary  dispensation.     The   tribunals   complained 
of  this  cumbrous  mode  of  administration,  and  declared 
that  it  hindered  them  from  properly  interrogating  the 
accused.     Every  effort  was  made  to  have  the  prohibition 
against  clerics  being  present  in  the  torture  chamber  re- 
moved.    Their  object  was    at   last   obtained   indirectly. 
On  April  27,  1260,  Alexander  IV  authorized  the   Inquis- 
itors and  their  associates  to  mutually  grant  all  the  needed 
dispensations   for  irregularities  that  might  be  incurred.^ 
This  permission  was  granted  a  second  time  by  Urban  IV, 
August  4,  1262;^  it  was  practically  an  authorization  to 
assist  at  the  interrogatories  at  which   torture  was  em- 
ployed.    From  this  time  the   Inquisitors  did  not  scruple 
to  appear  in  person  in  the  torture  chamber.     The  man- 

1  "Teneatur  podesta  vel  rector  hereticos  cogere,"  etc.     Bull  Ad  ex^ir panda. 

2  Collection  Doat,  xxxi,  fol.   277,  quoted  by  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i, 
p.  XXV,  n.  3. 

^  Regesta,  no.  18390;  Eymeric,  Directorium,  p.  132, 


THE    INQUISITION  155 

uals  of  the  Inquisition  record  this  practice  and  approve 
it.^ 

Torture  was  not  to  be  employed  until  the  judge  had 
been  convinced  that  gentle  means  were  of  no  a  vail. ^  Even 
in  the  torture  chamber,  while  the  prisoner  was  being 
stripped  of  his  garments  and  was  being  bound,  the  In- 
quisitor kept  urging  him  to  confess  his  guilt.  On  his 
refusal,  the  vexatio  began  with  slight  tortures.  If  these 
proved  ineffectual,  others  were  applied  with  gradually  in- 
creased severity;  at  the  very  beginning  the  victim  was 
shown  all  the  various  instruments  of  torture,  in  order 
that  the  mere  sight  of  them  might  terrify  him  into 
yielding.' 

The  Inquisitors  realized  so  well  that  such  forced  con- 
fessions were  valueless,  that  they  required  the  prisoner 
to  confirm  them  after  he  had  left  the  torture  chamber. 
The  torture  was  not  to  exceed  a  half  hour.  "Usually," 
writes  Lea,  "the  procedure  appears  to  be  that  the  torture 
was  continued  until  the  accuser  signified  his  readiness 
to  confess,  when  he  was  unbound  and  carried  into  an- 
other room  where  his  confession  was  made.     If,  however, 


1  Eymeric,  Directoriiim,  3*  pars,  p.  481;  Pegna's  Commentary,  p.  482. 

2  A  grave  suspicion  against  the  prisoner  was  required  before  he  could  be 
tortured.  "It  would  be  iniquitous,  and  a  violation  of  both  human  and  divine 
law  to  torture  anyone,  unless  there  was  good  evidence  against  him,  perche 
in  negotio  di  tanta  importanza  si  puo  facilmente  commetter  errore,'^  says  the 
Inquisitor  Eliseo  Masini  in  his  Sacro  Arsenate  ovvero  prattica  dell'  Officio 
della  santa  Inquisizione,  Bologna,  1665,  pp.  154,  155. 

3  Eymeric,  Director ium,  3^  pars.,  p.  481,  col.  i. 


156  THE   INQUISITION 

the  confession  was  extracted  during  the  torture,  it  was 
read  over  subsequently  to  the  prisoner,  and  he  was  asked 
if  it  were  true.  ...  In  any  case  the  record  was  carefully 
made  that  the  confession  was  free  and  spontaneous,  with- 
out the  pressure  of  force  or  fear."  ^ 

"It  is  a  noteworthy  fact,  however,  that  in  the  frag- 
mentary documents  of  inquisitorial  proceedings  which 
have  reached  us  the  references  to  torture  are  singularly 
few.  ...  In  the  six  hundred  and  thirty-six  sentences 
borne  upon  the  register  of  Toulouse  from  1309  to  1323,  the 
only  allusion  to  torture  is  in  the  recital  of  the  case  of 
Calvarie,  but  there  are  numerous  instances  in  which  the 
information  wrung  from  the  convicts  who  had  no  hope 
of  escape  could  scarce  have  been  procured  in  any  other 
manner.  Bernard  Gui,  who  conducted  the  Inquisition 
of  Toulouse  during  this  period,  has  too  emphatically 
expressed  his  sense  of  the  utility  of  torture  on  both 
principals  and  witnesses  for  us  to  doubt  his  readiness 
in  its  employment."  ^ 


1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  427.  Cf.  Eymeric,  Directorium,  ibid.,  p.  481 
col.  2;  Vidal,  op.  cit.,  1905,  p.  283.  The  Abbe  Vidal,  op.  cit.,  p.  155,  quotes 
an  instance  of  these  pretended  spontaneous  confessions  at  the  tribunal  of 
Pamiers;  the  records  state  that  a  certain  Guillem  Agassa  prcedicta  confessus 
fuit  sponte;  whereas  a  little  before  we  read:  ''postquam  depositus  fuit  de  tor- 
mento."  Lea  also  quotes  the  case  of  Guillem  Salavert,  who,  in  1303,  testified 
that  his  confession  esse  veram,  non  factam  vi  tormentor um,  although  he  had 
been  actually  tortured,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i.  p.  428. 

2  Lea.  op.  cit.,  p.  424.  "Talis  arctari  seu  restringi  poterit  in  dieta,  vel 
alias  in  carcere  seu  vinculis,  vel  etiam  qua^stionari  de  consilio  peritorum,  prout 
qualitas  negotii  et  personae  conditio  exegerit,  ut  Veritas  eruatur,"  says  Bernard 


THE   INQUISITION  157 

Besides,  the  investigation  which  Clement  V  ordered  into 
the  iniquities  of  the  Inquisition  of  Carcassonne  proves 
clearly  that  the  accused  were  frequently  subjected  to 
torture.^  That  we  rarely  find  reference  to  torture  in  the 
records  of  the  Inquisition  need  not  surprise  us.  For  in 
the  beginning,  torture  was  inflicted  by  civil  executioners 
outside  of  the  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition;  and  even  later 
on,  when  the  Inquisitors  were  allowed  to  take  part  in  it, 
it  was  considered  merely  a  means  of  making  the  prisoner 
declare  his  willingness  to  confess  afterwards.  A  confes- 
sion made  under  torture  had  no  force  in  law;  the  second 
confession  only  was  considered  valid.  That  is  why  it 
alone,  as  a  rule,  is  recorded. 

But  if  the  sufferings  of  the  victims  of  the  Inquisition 
were  not  deemed  worthy  of  mention  in  the  records,  they 
were  none  the  less  real  and  severe.  Imprudent  or  heart- 
less judges  were  guilty  of  grave  abuses  in  the  use  of  torture. 
Rome,  which  had  authorized  it,  at  last  intervened,  not,  we 
regret  to  say,  to  prohibit  it  altogether,  but  at  least  to 
reform  the  abuses  which  had  been  called  to  her  attention- 
One  reform  of  Clement  V  ordered  the  Inquisition  never 

Gui  in  his  Praclica,  p.  284;  cf.  p.  112,  no.  20;  p.  138,  no.  36.  " Possunt  etiam 
tales  heretici  per  questionum  tormenta  citra  membri  diminutionem  et  mortis 
periculum  .  .  .  et  errores  suos  expresse  fateri  et  accusare  alios  haereticos." 
Ibid.,  p.  218.  We  may  well  be  astonished,  therefore,  to  find  Mgr.  Douais, 
the  editor  of  the  Practica,  affirming  that  "the  Practica  of  Bernard  Gui  is 
silent  on  the  question  of  torture."     Doctiments,  vol.  i,  p.  238. 

1  Clement  V  required  the  consent  of  the  Inquisitor  and  the  local  Bishop 
before  a  heretic  could  be  tortured,  vel  tormentis  expoficre  illis.  Decretal 
MuUorum  querela,  in  Eymeric.     Directorium,  2^  pars,  p.  112. 


158  THE   INQUISITION 

to  use  torture  without  the  Bishop's  consent,  if  he  could 
be  reached  within  eight  days.' 

"  Bernard  Gui  emphatically  remonstrated  against  this 
as  seriously  crippling  the  efficiency  of  the  Inquisition,  and 
proposed  to  substitute  for  it  the  meaningless  phrase 
that  torture  should  only  be  used  with  mature  and  careful 
deliberation,  but  his  suggestion  was  not  heeded,  and  the 
Clementine  regulations  remained  the  law  of  the  Church."  ^ 

The  code  of  the  Inquisition  was  now  practically  com- 
plete, for  succeeding  Popes  made  no  change  of  any  impor- 
tance. The  data  before  us  prove  that  the  Church  forgot 
her  early  traditions  of  toleration,  and  borrowed  from  the 
Roman  jurisprudence,  revived  by  the  legists,  laws  and 
practices  which  remind  one  of  the  cruelty  of  ancient 
paganism.  But  once  this  criminal  code  was  adopted, 
she  endeavored  to  mitigate  the  cruelty  with  which  it  was 
enforced.  If  this  preoccupation  is  not  always  visible  — 
and  it  is  not  in  her  condemnation  of  obdurate  heretics  — we 
must  at  least  give  her  the  credit  of  insisting  that  torture 
"should  never  imperil  life  or  injure  limb":  Cogere  citra 
menibri  diminutionem  et  mortis  periculum. 

We  will  now  ask  how  the  theologians  and  canonists 
interpreted  this  legislation,  and  how  the  tribunals  of  the 
Inquisition  enforced  it. 

1  Decretal,  MuUorum  querela. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  424;  Bernard  Gui,  Practica,  ed.  Douais,  4"  pars, 
p.  188.  Bernard  Gui  did  not  hesitate  to  assert  (ibid.,  p.  174)  that  the  bulls 
of  Clement  V:  Multonim  querela  and  Nolentes  ought  to  be  modified  or  even 
repealed  so  as  to  give  more  freedom  to  the  Inquisitors :  indigent  ut  remedientur, 
suspendantur  aut  modereniur  in  melius,  seu  potius  totaliter. 


CHAPTER    VIII 

Theologians,  Canonists,  and    Casuists    of    the   In- 
quisition 

The  gravity  of  the  crime  of  heresy  was  early  recognized 
in  the  Church.  Gratian  discussed  this  question  in  a 
special  chapter  of  his  Decretum}  Innocent  III,  Guala 
the  Dominican,  and  the  Emperor  Frederic  II,  as  we  have 
seen,  looked  upon  heresy  as  treason  against  Almighty 
God,  i.e.  the  most  dreadful  of  crimes. 

The  theologians  and  even  the  civil  authorities  did  not 
concern  themselves  much  with  the  evil  effects  of  heresy 
upon  the  social  order,  but  viewed  it  rather  as  an  offense 
against  God.  Thus  they  made  no  distinction  between 
those  teachings  which  entailed  injury  on  the  family  and 
on  society,  and  those  which  merely  denied  certain  re- 
vealed truths.  Innocent  III,  in  his  constitution  of  Sep- 
tember 23,  1207,  legislated  particularly  against  the 
Patarins,  but  he  took  care  to  point  out  that  no  heretic, 
no  matter  what  the  nature  of  his  error  might  be,  should 
be  allowed  to  escape  the  full  penalty  of  the  law.^     Fred- 

1  Causa  xxxi,  q.  vii,  cap.  16. 

2  "Servanda  in  perpetuum  lege  sancimus  ut  quicumgue  hareticus,  maxime 
Paterenus  .  .  .  protinus  capiatur  et  tradatur  secular!  cviriae  puniendus  secun- 
dum legitimas  sanctiones,"  etc.     Ep.  x,  130. 

159 


i6o  THE   INQUISITION 

eric  II  spoke  in  similar  terms  in  his  Constitutions  of  1220, 
1224,  and  1232.^  This  was  the  current  teaching  through- 
out the  Middle  Ages.^ 

But  it  is  important  to  know  what  men  then  under- 
stood by  the  word  heresy.  We  can  ascertain  this 
from  the  theologians  and  canonists,  especially  from  St. 
Raymond  of  Pennafort  and  St.  Thomas  Aquinas.  St. 
Raymond  gives  four  meanings  to  the  word  heretic,  but 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  canon  law  he  says:  "A  heretic 
is  one  who  denies  the  faith."  ^  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  is 
more  accurate.  He  declares  that  no  one  is  truly  a  heretic 
unless  he  obstinately  maintains  his  error,  even  after  it 
has  been  pointed  out  to  him  by  ecclesiastical  authority. 
This  is  the  teaching  of  St.  Augustine.'* 

^"Catharos,  Paterenos,  Leonistas,  Speronistas,  Arnoldistas,  et  omnes 
hareticos  utriusque  sexus,  quocumque  nomine  censeantur,  perpetua  dampnamus 
infamia,"  etc.  Constitution  of  November  22,  1220,  cap.  6,  in  Mon.  Germ., 
Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  pp.  107-109.  "Ut  quicumque  .  .  .  fuerii  de  hceresi 
manijeste  convictus  et  hcBreticus  judicatus  .  .  .  illico  capiatur,"  etc.  Con- 
stitut.  de  1223,  ibid.,  p.  126.  "Si  inventi  fuerint  a  fide  catholica  salient  in 
articulo  deviate  .  .  . ,  mortem  pati  decernimus."  Sicilian  Constitution,  i,  3, 
in  Eymeric,  Direct.  Inquisit.,  Appendix,  p.  14.  This  recalls  the  law  of 
Arcadius  of  395.     Cod.  Theod.,  xvi,  v.  28;  cf.  supra  p.  9,  n.  2. 

^  Cf.  the  canonists  cited  by  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  455-458.  An  anonymous 
writer,  whose  commentary  is  found  in  Huguccio's  Summa  of  the  Decretum, 
says:  "Innuit  quod  pro  sola  hceresi  non  sint  morte  puniendi.  Solve  ut  prius. 
Quando  enim  sunt  incorrigibles,  ultimo  supplicio  feriantur;  aliter  non."  Bibl. 
nation.,  Ms.  15379,  fol.  49. 

3  "Haereticus  \°  qui  errat  a  fide,"  etc.  S.  Raymundi,  Summa,  lib.  i,  cap. 
De  HcBreticis,  sect,  i,  Roman  Edition,  1603,  p.  39. 

^"Hjeresis  consistit  circa  ea  quae  fidei  sunt  .  .  .  dissentiendo  cum  perti- 
nacia  ab  illis."  Summa,  Ila,  Ilae,  quaest.  xi,  Conclueio;  cf.  ibid.,  ad  3um, 
quotations  from  St.  Augustine 


THE    INQUISITION  i6i 

But  by  degrees  the  word,  taken  at  first  in  a  strict  sense, 
acquired  a  broader  meaning.  St.  Raymond  includes 
schism  in  the  notion  of  heresy.  "The  only  difference 
between  these  two  crimes,"  he  writes,  "is  the  diflference 
between  genus  and  species";  every  schism  ends  in  heresy. 
And  relying  on  the  authority  of  St.  Jerome,  the  rigorous 
canonist  goes  so  far  as  to  declare  that  schism  is  even  a 
greater  crime  than  heresy.  He  proves  this  by  the  fact 
that  Core,  Dathan,  and  Abiron,^  who  seceded  from  the 
chosen  people,  were  punished  by  the  most  terrible  of 
punishments.  "From  the  enormity  of  the  punishment, 
must  we  not  argue  the  enormity  of  the  crime?"  St. 
Raymond  therefore  declares  that  the  same  punishment 
must  be  inflicted  upon  the  heretic  and  the  schismatic.^ 

"The  authors  of  the  treatises  on  the  Inquisition," 
writes  Tanon,  "classed  as  heretics  all  those  who  favored 
heresy,  and  all  excommunicates  who  did  not  submit  to 
the  church  within  a  certain  period.  They  declared  that 
a  man  excommunicated  for  any  cause  whatever,  who  did 
not  seek  absolution  within  a  year,  incurred  by  this  act 
of  rebellion  a  light  suspicion  of  heresy;  that  he  could  then 
be  cited  before  the  Inquisitor  to  answer  not  only  for  the 
crime  which  had  caused  his  excommunication,  but  also 
for  his  orthodoxy.     If  he  did  not  answer  this  second  sum- 

1  Num.  xvi.  31-33. 

2  "Talis  est  differentia  qualiter  inter  genus  et  speciem  .  .  .  ;  peccatum 
gravius  haeresi  .  .  .  ,  quis  enim  dubitaverit  esse  sceleratius  commissum  quod 
est  gravius  vindicatum?"     Loc.  cit.,  lib.  i,  cap.  De  schismatics,  pp.  45-47. 

12 


,62  THE   INQUISITION 

mons,  he  was  at  once  considered  excommunicated  for 
heresy,  and  if  he  remained  under  this  second  excommuni- 
cation for  a  year,  he  was  liable  to  be  condemned  as  a  real 
heretic.  The  light  suspicion  caused  by  his  first  excom- 
munication became  in  turn  a  vehement  and  then  a  violent 
suspicion  which,  together  with  his  continued  contumacy, 
constituted  a  full  proof  of  heresy."  ^ 

The  theologians  insisted  greatly  upon  respect  for  eccle- 
siastical and  especially  Papal  authority.  Everything  that 
tended  to  lessen  this  authority  seemed  to  them  a  practical 
denial  of  the  faith.  The  canonist  Henry  of  Susa  (Hosti- 
ensis  +1271),  went  so  far  as  to  say  that  "whoever  con- 
tradicted or  refused  to  accept  the  decretals  of  the  Popes 
was  a  heretic."  ^  Such  obedience  was  looked  upon  as  a 
culpable  disregard  of  the  rights  of  the  papacy,  and  con- 
sequently a  form  of  heresy.^ 

Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  235,  236.  "Si  quis  per  annum  excommunicatus 
stetit  pro  contumacia  in  causa  quae  non  sit  fidei,  effictur  suspectus  leviter  de 
hferesi,  et  ut  responsurus  de  fide  potest  citari.  Si  renuit  comparere,  eo  facto 
est  excommunicatus,  tanquam  contumax  in  causa  fidei,  et  consequenter 
aggravatur,  quia  jam  fit  suspectus  de  hasresi  vehementer  .  .  .  Tunc  vel  infra 
annum  comparet,  vel  non.  Si  non,  tunc  anno  elapso  est  ut  hsereticus  con- 
demnandus.  Transivit  enim  suspicio  levis  in  vehementem,  et  vehemens  in 
violentam."  Eymeric,  Directorium,  2"  pars,  quest.  47,  pp.  360,  361.  This 
theory  was  not  carried  out  in  practice  {op.  cit.,  p.  236). 

2  "Hasreticus  est,  qui  decretalibus  epistolis  contradicit  aut  eos  non  recipit." 
In  Baluze-Mansi,  Miscellanea,  vol.  ii,  p.  275;  cf.  DoUinger,  La  papaute, 
Paris,  1904,  p.  335,  n.  362. 

The  canonist,  Zanchino  Ugolini,  in  his  Tractatus  de  Hxreticis,  cap.  ii, 
published  at  Rome  in  1568,  at  the  expense  of  Pius  V,  includes  in  his  enume- 
ration of  heresies  neglect  to  observe  the  papal  decretals,  because  this  consti- 
tuted an  apparent  contempt  for  the  power  of  the  Keys.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i, 
p.  229,  note. 


THE   INQUISITION  163 

Superstition  was  also  classed  under  the  heading  of 
heresy.  The  canonist,  Zanchino  Ugolini  tells  us  that  he 
was  present  at  the  condemnation  of  an  immoral  priest, 
who  was  punished  by  the  Inquisitors  not  for  his  licentious- 
ness, but  because  he  said  mass  every  day  in  a  state  of  sin, 
and  urged  in  excuse  that  he  considered  himself  pardoned 
by  the  mere  fact  of  putting  on  the  sacred  vestments.* 

The  Jews,  as  such,  were  never  regarded  as  heretics. 
But  the  usury  they  so  widely  practiced  evidenced  an 
unorthodox  doctrine  on  thievery,  which  made  them 
liable  to  be  suspected  of  heresy.  Indeed  we  fmd  several 
Popes  upbraiding  them  "for  maintaining  that  usury  is 
not  a  sin.''  Some  Christians  also  fell  into  the  same  error, 
and  thereby  became  subject  to  the  Inquisition.  Pope 
Martin  V,  in  his  bull  of  November  6,  141 9,  authorizes  the 
Inquisitors  to  prosecute  these  usurers.^ 

Sorcery  and  magic  were  also  put  on  a  par  with  heresy. 
Pope  Alexander  IV  had  decided  that  divination  and 
sorcery  did  not  fall  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion, unless  there  was  manifest  heresy  involved.^     But 

1  Tractat,  de  Hcsret.,  cap.  ii;  cf.  Lea,  ibid.,  p.  400.  Sentences  of  this  kind 
were  rather  rare;  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  249,  250,  notes. 

2"Demum  etiam  quidam  Christiani  et  Judaei  non  verentur  asserere  quod 
usura  non  sit  peccatum,  aut  recipere  decern  pro  centum  mutuo  datis  seu 
quicquam  ultra  sortem;  in  his  et  simiUbus  atque  in  nonnulHs  aliis  spirituaUbus 
et  gravibus  praeceptis  multipUciter  excedunt.  Nos  igitur  discretioni  tuas 
committimus  quatenus  ad  extirpationem  omnium  hujusmodi  pravitatum  et 
errorum  vigilanter  insistas."  Bull  Inter  ccetera,  sent  to  the  Inquisitor  Pons 
Feugeyron.     Cf.  Tanon,  cit.,  pp.  243,  245. 

3  Bull  of  December  9,  1257,  in  Doat,  xxxi,  fol.  244-249,  analyzed  by  Douais, 


,64  THE   INQUISITION 

casuists  were  not  wanting  to  prove  that  heresy  was  in- 
volved in  such  cases. ^  The  belief  in  the  witches*  nightly 
rides  through  the  air,  led  by  Diana  or  Herodias  of  Pales- 
tine, was  very  widespread  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  was 
held  by  some  as  late  as  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
question  whether  the  devil  could  carry  off  men  and 
women  was  warmly  debated  by  the  theologians  of  the 
time.  "A  case  adduced  by  Albertus  Magnus,  in  a  dis- 
putation on  the  subject  before  the  Bishop  of  Paris,  and 
recorded  by  Thomas  of  Cantimpre,  in  which  the  daughter 
of  the  Count  of  Schwalenberg  was  regularly  carried  away 
every  night  for  several  hours,  gave  immense  satisfac- 
tion to  the  adherents  of  the  new  doctrine,  and  eventually 
an  ample  store  of  more  modern  instances  was  accumu- 
lated to  confirm  Satan  in  his  enlarged  privileges."  ^ 
Satan,  it  seems,  imprinted  upon  his  clients  an  indelible 
mark,  the  stigma  diabolicum. 

"In  1458,  the  Inquisitor  Nicholas  Jaquerius  remarked 
reasonably  enough  that  even  if  the  affair  was  an  illusion, 
it  was  none  the  less  heretical,  as  the  followers  of  Diana 

Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  xxv.  Cf.  Bull,  Quod  super  Nonnullis,  of  January  10, 
1260:  "Respondetur  quod  .  .  .  inquisitores  ipsi  de  iis  (divinationibus  et 
sortilegiis),  nisi  manifeste  saperent  haeresim  se  nullatenus  intromittant." 
RipolL,  vol.  i,  p.  388. 

1  For  the  attitude  of  the  church  toward  sorcerers,  cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii, 
pp.  434-436.  When  the  celebrated  canonist,  Astesa-Jius  of  Asti,  wrote  his 
Summa  de  Casibus  Conscientice  in  131 7,  the  canons  decreed  only  a  penance 
of  forty  days  for  magic. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii,  p.  497;  Thomas  of  Cantimpre.  Bonum  Universale, 
lib.  iii,  cap.  Iv. 


THE   INQUISITION  165 

and  Herodias  were  necessarily  heretics  in  their  waking 
hours."  1 

About  1250,  the  Inquisitor  Bernard  of  Como  taught 
categorically  that  the  phenomena  of  witchcraft,  especially 
the  attendance  at  the  witches'  Sabbat,  were  not  fanciful 
but  real:  "This  is  proved,"  he  says,  "from  the  fact  that 
the  Popes  permitted  witches  to  be  burned  at  the  stake; 
they  would  not  have  countenanced  this,  if  these  persons 
were  not  real  heretics,  and  their  crimes  only  imaginary, 
for  the  Church  only  punishes  proved  crimes."  ^  Witch- 
craft was,  therefore,  amenable  to  the  tribunals  of  the 
Inquisition.^ 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  pp.  497,  498,  with  reference  to  Nicholas  Jaquerius,  Flagel- 
lum  hiBreticorum,  cap.  vii  and  xxviii. 

2"Praeterea  plurimae  hujus  perfidae  sectas  .  .  .  combustae,  quod  minime 
factum  fuisset,  neque  summi  pontifices  hoc  tolerassent,  si  taha  tantummodo 
phantastice  et  in  somniis  contingerent,  et  tales  personse  realiter  et  veraciter 
haereticae  non  essent,  et  in  hasresi  realiter  et  manifeste  deprehensas  .  .  .  nam 
ecclesia  non  punit  crimina  nisi  manifesta  et  vere  deprehensa  .  .  .  Per  hgec 
ergo  omnia  quae  dicta  sunt,  et  per  plura  alia  qu^  adduci  possent,  Hquido 
constat,  quod  tales  strigiae  ad  praefatum  ludum  non  in  somniis  neque  phan- 
tastice, ut  quidam  affirmant,  sed  realiter  et  corporaliter  ac  vigilando  vadant." 
Lucerna  Inquisitorujn,  Romae,  1584,  p.  144. 

3  In  a  letter  of  one  of  the  cardinals  of  the  Holy  Office,  dated  1643,  witch- 
craft is  classed  with  heresy:  "Contra  quoscumque  haereticos  et  a  fide  Christiana 
apostatas,  aut  cujusvis  damnatae  haeresis  sectatores,  sortilegia  hsresim  sa- 
pientia,  seu  de  heeresi  vel  de  apostasia  a  fide  suspectos,  divinationes  et  incan- 
tationes  aliaque  diabolica  maleficia  et  prestigia  contractantes."  Douais, 
Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  ccliv.  In  practice,  the  heretical  tendency  of  witchcraft 
was  hard  to  determine.  Each  judge,  therefore,  as  a  rule,  pronounced  sen- 
tence according  to  his  own  judgment.  In  145 1,  Nicholas  V  enlarged  the 
powers  of  Hugues  le  Noir,  Inquisitor  of  France,  by  granting  him  jurisdiction 
over  divination,  even  when  it  did  not  savor  of  heresy.  (Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii, 
512,  Ripoll,  Bullarium,  vol.  iii,  p.  301.)     In  this  way  astrologers,  palmists. 


i66  THE   INQUISITION 

While  the  casuists  thus  increased  the  number  of  crimes 
which  the  Inquisition  could  prosecute,  on  the  other  hand 
they  shortened  the  judicial  procedure  then  in  vogue. 

Following  the  Roman  law,  the  Inquisition  at  first 
recognized  three  forms  of  action  in  criminal  cases  — 
accusatio,  denuntiatio  and  inquisitio.  In  the  accusatio, 
the  accuser  formally  inscribed  himself  as  able  to  prove 
his  accusation;  if  he  failed  to  do  so,  he  had  to  undergo 
the  penalty  which  the  prisoner  would  have  incurred 
(pcena  talionis)}  "From  the  very  beginning,  he  was 
placed  in  the  same  position  as  the  one  he  accused,  even 
to  the  extent  of  sharing  his  imprisonment."  ^  The 
denuntiatio  did  not  in  any  way  bind  the  accuser;  he 
merely  handed  in  his  testimony,  and  then  ceased  prose- 
cuting the  case;  the  judge  at  once  proceeded  to  take 
action  against  the  accused.  In  the  inquisitio,  there  was 
no  one  either  to  accuse  or  denounce  the  criminal;  the 
judge  cited  the  suspected  criminal  before  him  and  pro- 
ceeded to  try  him.  This  was  the  most  common  method 
of  procedure;  from  it  the  Inquisition  received  its 
name.^ 

and  diviners  all  became  subject  to  the  Inquisition.  Cf.  Bull  of  Sixtus  V, 
Cceli  et  terra,  January  5,  1586,  on  astrologers.  (Eymeric,  Directorum,  Pegna's 
Bullarium,  p.  142.) 

i"Et  hoc  quidem  generaliter  verum  est,  quod  nullus  auditur  accusans 
sine  libelli  inscriptione,  in  quo  obliget  se  ad  paenam  talionis."  TancrMe, 
Ordo  judiciorum,  lib.  ii,  cap.  Qualiter,  Lyons  ed.,  1547,  p.  91.  For  the 
practice  and  exceptions  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  260,  n.  4. 

2  Tancrede,  ibid.,  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  259. 

2  On  these  three  forms  of  action,  cf.  Eymeric,  Directorium,  3^  pars,  p.  413 


THE    INQUISITION  167 

The  Inquisitorial  procedure  was  therefore  inspired  by 
the  Roman  law.  But  in  practice  the  accusatio,  which 
gave  the  prisoner  a  chance  to  meet  the  charges  against 
him,  was  soon  abandoned.  In  fact  the  Inquisitors  were 
always  most  anxious  to  set  it  aside.  Urban  IV  enacted 
a  decree,  July  28,  1262,  whereby  they  were  allowed  to 
proceed  simpliciter  et  de  piano,  absque  advocaiorum  strepitu 
et  figura}  Bernard  Gui  insisted  on  this  in  his  Practica? 
Eymeric  advised  his  associates,  when  an  accuser  ap- 
peared before  them  who  was  perfectly  willing  to  accept 
the  pcena  talionis  in  case  of  failure,  to  urge  the  im- 
prudent man  to  withdraw  his  demand.  For  he  argued 
that  the  accusatio  might  prove  harmful  to  himself,  and 
besides  give  too  much  room  for  trickery.'  In  other  words, 
the  Inquisitors  wished  to  be  perfectly  untrammeled  in 
their  action. 

The  secrecy  of  the  Inquisition's  procedure  was  one  of 
the  chief  causes  of  complaint. 

But  the  Inquisition,  dreadful  as  it  was,  did  not  lack 
defenders.  Some  of  their  arguments  were  most  extrava- 
gant and  far-fetched.     "Paramo  in  the  quaint  pedantry 

et  seq.  Innocent  III  introduced  the  inquisitio  into  the  canonical  legislation 
as  the  regular  method  of  procedure.     Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  283-285. 

1  Bull  Prx  cunctis  of  July  28,  1262,  in  RipoU,  Bullarium,  vol.  i,  p.  428; 
Sexto,  De  Hareticis,  cap.  20:  Limborch,  p.  268. 

"^  Practica,  4^  pars,  ed.  Douais,  p.  192. 

3  "Inquisitor  istum  modum  non  libenter  admittat,  turn  quia  non  est  in 
causa  fidei  usitatus,  turn  quia  est  accusanti  multum  periculosus,  turn  quia 
est  multum  litigiosus.     " Director ium,"  p.  414,  col.  i. 


i68  THE    INQUISITION 

with  which  he  ingeniously  proves  that  God  was  the  first 
Inquisitor,  and  the  condemnation  of  Adam  and  Eve  the 
first  model  of  the  Inquisitorial  process,  triumphantly 
points  out  that  he  judges  them  in  secret,  thus  setting  the 
example  which  the  Inquisition  is  bound  to  follow,  and 
avoiding  the  subtleties  which  the  criminals  would  have 
raised  in  their  defence,  especially  at  the  suggestion  of  the 
crafty  serpent.  That  he  called  no  witnesses  is  explained 
by  the  confession  of  the  accused,  and  ample  legal  author- 
ity is  cited  to  show  that  these  confessions  were  sufficient 
to  justify  the  conviction  and  punishment."  ^ 

The  subtlety  of  the  casuists  had  full  play  when  they 
came  to  discuss  the  torture  of  the  prisoner  who  absolutely 
refused  to  confess.  According  to  law  the  torture  could 
be  inflicted  but  once,  but  this  regulation  was  easily  evaded. 
For  it  was  lawful  to  subject  the  prisoner  to  all  the  various 
kinds  of  torture  in  succession;  and  if  additional  evidence 
were  discovered,  the  torture  could  be  repeated.  When 
they  desired,  therefore,  to  repeat  the  torture,  even  after 
an  interval  of  some  days,  they  evaded  the  law  by  call- 
ing it  technically  not  a  "repetition"  but  a  "continuance 
of  the  first  torture":  Ad  continuandttm  iormenta,  non 
ad   tterandum,    as    Eymeric    styles    it.^    This    quibbling 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  406;  Louis  de  Paramo,  De  on'gine  et  progresstc 
officii  santcB  Inquisitionis  ejusque  utilitate  et  dignitate  libri  tres,  Madrid,  1598, 
PP-  32,  2>2>- 

2  "Quod  si,  questionatus  decenter,  noluerit  fateri  veritatem,   ponanatur 


THE    INQUISITION  169 

of  course  gave  full  scope  to  the  cruelty  and  the  indis- 
creet zeal  of  the  Inquisitors.^ 

But  a  new  difficulty  soon  arose.  Confessions,  ex- 
torted under  torture,  had,  as  we  have  seen,  no  legal 
value.  Eymeric  himself  admitted  that  the  results  ob- 
tained in  this  way  were  very  unreliable,  and  that  the 
Inquisitors  should  realize  this  fact.^ 

If,  on  leaving  the  torture  chamber,  the  prisoner  re- 
iterated his  confession,^  the  case  was  at  once  decided. 
But  suppose,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  confession  ex- 
torted under  torture  was  afterwards  retracted,  what  was 
to  be  done?  The  Inquisitors  did  not  agree  upon  this 
point.  Some  of  them,  like  Eymeric,  held  that  in  this  case 
the  prisoner  was  entitled  to  his  freedom.  Others,  like 
the  author  of  the  Sacro  Arsenale,  held  that  "the  torture 
should  be  repeated,  in  order  that  the  prisoner  might  be 
forced  to  reiterate  his  first  confession  ^  which  had  evi- 


alia  genera  tormentorum  coram  eo,  dicendo  quod  oportet  eum  transire  per 
omnia,  nisi  prodat  veritatem;  quod  si  nee  sic,  poterit  ad  terrorem,  vel  etiam 
ad  veritatem  secunda  dies  vel  tertia  assignari,  ad  continuandum  tormenta, 
non  ad  iterandum:  quia  iterari,  non  debent,  nisi  novis  supervenientibus  indiciis 
contra  eum;  quia  tunc  possunt;  sed  continuari  non  prohibentur."  Eymeric, 
Directorium,  3^  pars,  p.  481,  col.  2. 

1  In  13 1 7,  Bernard  Gui,  complaining  of  the  Clementine  restrictions,  asks 
why  the  Bishops  should  be  limited  in  applying  torture  to  heretics,  when  they 
could  apply  it  without  limit  in  everything  else.  Gravamina,  coll.  Doat,  xxx, 
loi;  cf.  Lea,  op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  p.  557. 

2"Scientes  quod  quaestiones  sunt  fallaces  et  inefficaces."  Op.  cit.,  p.  481, 
col.  I. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  481,  col.  2. 

4  Masini,  Sacro  Arsenale,  pp.  183-186. 


lyo  THE   INQUISITION 

dently  compromised  him."    This  seems  to  have  been  the 
traditional  practice  of  the  Italian  tribunals. 

But  the  casuists  did  not  stop  here.  They  discovered 
"that  Clement  V  had  only  spoken  of  torture  in  general, 
and  had  not  specifically  alluded  to  witnesses,  whence  they 
concluded  that  one  of  the  most  shocking  abuses  of  the 
system,  the  torture  of  witnesses,  was  left  to  the  sole  dis- 
cretion of  the  Inquisitor,  and  this  became  the  accepted 
rule.  It  only  required  an  additional  step  to  show  that 
after  the  accused  had  been  convicted  by  evidence  or  had 
confessed  as  to  himself,  he  became  a  witness  as  to  the 
guilt  of  his  friends,  and  thus  could  be  arbitrarily  (?)  tor- 
tured to  betray  them."  ^ 

As  a  matter  of  course,  the  canonists  and  the  theologians 
approved  the  severest  penalties  inflicted  by  the  Inquisi- 
tion. St.  Raymond  of  Pennafort,  however,  who  was 
one  of  the  most  favored  counsellors  of  Gregory  IX,  still 
upheld  the  criminal  code  of  Innocent  111.  The  sever- 
est penalties  he  defended  were  the  excommunication 
of  heretics  and  schismatics,  their  banishment  and  the 
confiscation   of   their   property. ^     His   Summa   was    un- 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  425. 

2  Lea  writes  {op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  229,  note):  "Saint  Raymond  of  Pennafort, 
the  compiler  of  the  decretals  of  Gregory  IX,  who  was  the  highest  authority 
in  his  generation,  lays  it  down  as  a  principle  of  ecclesiastical  law  that  the 
heretic  is  to  be  coerced  by  excommunication  and  confiscation,  and  if  they 
fail,  by  the  extreme  exercise  of  the  secular  power.  The  man  who  was  doubtful 
in  faith  was  to  be  held  a  heretic   and  so  also  was  the  schismatic  who,  while 


THE    INQUISITION  171 

doubtedly  completed  when  the  Decretal  of  Gregory  IX 
appeared,  authorizing  the  Inquisitors  to  enforce  the  cruel 
laws  of  Frederic  II. 

But  St.  Thomas,  who  wrote  at  a  time  when  the  Inquisi- 
tion was  in  full  operation,  felt  called  upon  to  defend  the 
infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon  heretics  and  the 
relapsed.  His  words  deserve  careful  consideration.  He 
begins  by  answering  the  objections  that  might  be  brought 
from  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers  against  his  thesis. 
The  first  of  these  is  the  well-known  passage  of  St.  Matthew, 
in  which  our  Savior  forbids  the  servants  of  the  house- 
holder to  gather  up  the  cockle  before  the  harvest  time, 
lest  they  root  up  the  wheat  with  it.^  St.  John  Chrysostom, 
he  says,  ''argues  from  this  text  that  it  is  wrong  to  put 
heretics  to  death."  ^  But  according  to  St.  Augustine  the 
words  of  the  Savior:  "Let  the  cockle  grow  until  the  har- 
vest," are  explained  at  once  by  what  follows:  "lest  per- 
haps gathering  up  the  cockle,  you  root  up  the  wheat  also 
with  it."  When  there  is  no  danger  of  uprooting  the  wheat 
and  no  danger  of  schism,  violent  measures  may  be  used: 

believing  all  the  articles  of  religion,  refused  the  obedience  due  to  the  Roman 
Church.  All  alike  were  to  be  forced  into  the  Roman  fold,  and  the  fate  of 
Core,  Dathan  and  Abiron  was  invoked  for  the  destruction  of  the  obstinate." 
(Summa,  lib.  i,  tit.  v,  2,  4,  8;  tit.  vi,  i).  This  is  a  travesty  of  the  mind  and 
words  of  Saint  Raymond.  He  merely  called  attention  to  the  lot  of  Core, 
Dathan  and  Abiron  to  show  what  a  great  crime  schism  was.  He  never 
asserted  that  heretics  or  schismatics,  even  when  obdurate,  ought  to  be  "de- 
stroyed."    Summa,  lib.  i,  cap.  De  Hctreticis  and  De  Schismaticis. 

1  Matt.  xiii.  28,  30. 

2  In  Maithxum,  Homil.  xlvi. 


,72  THE   INQUISITION 

Cum  metus  iste  non  suhest  .  .  .  non  dormiat  severitas  dis- 
ciplince}  We  doubt  very  much  whether  such  reason- 
ing would  have  satisfied  St.  John  Chrysostom,  St. 
Theodore  the  Studite,  or  Bishop  Wazo,  who  understood 
the  Savior's  prohibition  in  a  literal  and  an  absolute 
sense. 

But  this  passage  does  not  reveal  the  whole  mind  of  the 
Angelic  doctor.  It  is  more  evident  in  his  exegesis  of 
Ezechiel  xviii.  32,  Nolo  mortem  peccatoris.  "Assuredly," 
he  writes,  "none  of  us  desires  the  death  of  a  single  heretic. 
But  remember  that  the  house  of  David  could  not  obtain 
peace  until  Absalom  was  killed  in  the  war  he  waged  against 
his  father.  In  like  manner,  the  Catholic  Church  saves 
some  of  her  children  by  the  death  of  others,  and  consoles 
her  sorrowing  heart  by  reflecting  that  she  is  acting  for 
the  general  good."  ^ 

If  we  are  not  mistaken,  St.  Thomas  is  here  trying  to 
prove  on  the  authority  of  St.  Augustine  that  it  is  some- 
times lawful  to  put  heretics  to  death. 

But  it  is  only  by  garbling  and  distorting  the  context 
that  St.  Thomas  makes  the  Bishop  of  Hippo  advocate  the 
very  penalty  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  he  always 
denounced  most  strongly.  In  the  passage  quoted,  St. 
Augustine  was  speaking  of  the  benefit  that  ensues  to  the 


1  Augustine,  Contra  epistol.  Parmeniani,  lib.  iii,  cap.  ii.    S.  Thomas,  Summa, 
Ila,  Ilae,  quaest.  x,  art.  8,  ad  4m. 

-  S.  Thomas,  Sumnia,  loc.  cit.,  ad  4m. 


THE    INQUISITION  173 

church  from  the  suicide  of  heretics,  but  he  had  no  idea 
whatever  of  maintaining  that  the  church  had  the  right 
to  put  to  death  her  rebellious  children.^  St.  Thomas 
misses  the  point  entirely,  and  gives  his  readers  a  false  idea 
of  the  teaching  of  St.  Augustine. 

Thinking,  however,  that  he  has  satisfactorily  answered 
all  the  objections  against  his  thesis,  he  states  it  as  fol- 
lows: "Heretics  who  persist  in  their  error  after  a  second 
admonition  ought  not  only  to  be  excommunicated,  but 
also  abandoned  to  the  secular  arm  to  be  put  to  death. 
For,  he  argues,  it  is  much  more  wicked  to  corrupt  the 
faith  on  which  depends  the  life  of  the  soul,  than  to  de- 
base the  coinage  which  provides  merely  for  temporal  life ; 
wherefore,  if  coiners  and  other  malefactors  are  justly 
doomed  to  death,  much  more  may  heretics  be  justly 
slain  once  they  are  convicted.  If,  therefore,  they  per- 
sist in  their  error  after  two  admonitions,  the  Church 
despairs  of  their  conversion,  and  excommunicates  them 
to  ensure  the  salvation  of  others  whom  they  might  cor- 

1  "Illi  autem  .  .  .  quod  sibi  faciunt,  nobis  imputant.  Quis  enim  nostrvun 
velit  non  solum  aliquem  illorum  perire,  verumetiam  aliquid  perdere  ?  Sed  si 
aliter  non  meruit  pacem  habere  domus  David,  nisi  Absalon  filius  ejus  in 
bello  quod  contra  patrem  gerebat,  fuisset  extinctus,  quamvis  magna  cura 
mandaverit  suis,  ut  eum  quantum  possent  vivum  salvumque  servarent,  ut 
asset  cui  pcenitenti  paternus  affectus  ignosceret,  quid  ei  restitit,  nisi  perditum 
flere  et  sui  regni  pace  acquisita  suam  maestitiam  consolari  ?  Sic  ergo  catholica 
mater  Ecclesia,  bellantibus  adversus  eam  quibus  allis  quam  filiis  suis  .  .  .  , 
si  aliquorum  perditione  cseteros  tarn  multos  colligit,  prassertim  quia  isii,  non 
sicut  Absalon  casu  bellico,  sed  spontanea  magis  interitu  pereunt,  dolorem 
materni  cordis  lenit  et  sanat  tantorum  liberatione  populorum."  Ep.  clxxxv, 
ad  Bonijacium,  no.  32. 


174  THE   INQUISITION 

rupt ;  she  then  abandons  them  to  the  secular  arm  that 
they  may  be  put  to  death."  ^ 

St.  Thomas  in  this  passage  makes  a  mere  comparison 
serve  as  an  argument.  He  does  not  seem  to  realize  that 
if  his  reasoning  were  valid,  the  Church  could  go  a  great 
deal  further,  and  have  the  death  penalty  inflicted  in 
many  other  cases. 

The  fate  of  the  relapsed  heretic  had  varied  from  Lucius 
III  to  Alexander  IV.  The  bull  Ad  Aholendam  decreed 
that  converted  heretics  who  relapsed  into  heresy  were 
to  be  abandoned  to  the  secular  arm  without  trial.^  But 
at  the  time  this  Decretal  was  published,  the  Animadversio 
dedita  of  the  State  entailed  no  severer  penalty  than  banish- 
ment  and  confiscation.  When  this  term,  already  fearful 
enough,  came  to  mean  the  death  penalty,  the  Inquisitors 
did  not  know  whether  to  follow  the  ancient  custom  or  to 
adopt  the  new  interpretation.  For  a  long  time  they 
followed  the  traditional  custom.  Bernard  of  Caux,  who 
was  undoubtedly  a  zealous  Inquisitor,  is  a  case  in  point. 
In  his  register  of  sentences  from  1244  to  1248,  we  meet 
with  sixty  cases  of  relapse,  not  one  of  whom  was  punished 
by  a  penalty  severer  than  imprisonment.  But  a  little 
later  on  the  strict  interpretation  of  the  Animadversio 

J  Summa,  Ila  Ilae,  quaest.  xi,  art.  3. 

2'*Illos  quoque  qui,  post  abjurationem  praefati  erroris  .  .  .  ,  deprehensi 
fuerint  in  abjuratam  haeresim  recidisse,  seculari  judicio  sine  uUa  penitus 
audientia  decernimus  relinquendos."  Decretals,  in  cap.  ix,  De  hareticis^ 
lib.  V,  tit.  vii. 


THE   INQUISITION  175 

debiia  began  to  prevail.^  In  St.  Thomas's  time  it  meant 
the  death  penalty;  and  we  find  him  citing  the  bull  Ad 
Aholendam  ^  as  his  authority  for  the  infliction  of  the 
death  penalty  upon  the  relapsed,  penitent  or  impenitent, 
in  ignorance  of  the  fact  that  this  document  originally  had 
a  totally  different  interpretation. 

His  reasoning  therefore  rests  on  a  false  supposition. 
He  advocates  the  death  penalty  for  the  relapsed  in  the 
name  of  Christian  charity.  For,  he  argues,  charity  has 
for  its  object  the  spiritual  and  temporal  welfare  of  one's 
neighbor.  His  spiritual  welfare  is  the  salvation  of  his 
soul;  his  temporal  welfare  is  life,  and  temporal  advan- 
tages, such  as  riches,  dignities,  and  the  like.  These  tem- 
poral advantages  are  subordinate  to  the  spiritual,  and 
charity  must  prevent  their  endangering  the  eternal  sal- 
vation of  their  possessor.  Charity,  therefore,  to  himself 
and  to  others,  prompts  us  to  deprive  him  of  these  temporal 
goods,  if  he  makes  a  bad  use  of  them.  For  if  we  allowed 
the  relapsed  heretic  to  live,  we  would  undoubtedly  en- 
danger the  salvation  of  others,  either  because  he  would 
corrupt  the  faithful  whom  he  met,  or  because  his  escape 
from  punishment  would  lead  others  to  believe  they  could 
deny  the  faith  with  impunity.  The  inconstancy  of  the 
relapsed  is,  therefore,  a  sufficient  reason  why  the  Church, 

1  On  the  various  views  of  the  casuists  regarding  the  relapsed,  cf.  Lea, 
op.  cii.,  vol.  i,  pp.  543-546. 

2  Summa,  Ila  Ilae,  quaest.  ix,  art.  4:  Sed  contra. 


,76  THE   INQUISITION 

although  she  receives  him  to  penance  for  his  soul's  salva- 
tion, refuses  to  free  him  from  the  death  penalty.^ 

Such  reasoning  is  not  very  convincing.  Why  would 
not  the  life  imprisonment  of  the  heretic  safeguard  the 
faithful  as  well  as  his  death?  Will  you  answer  that  this 
penalty  is  too  trivial  to  prevent  the  faithful  from  falling 
into  heresy?  If  that  be  so,  why  not  at  once  condemn 
all  heretics  to  death,  even  when  repentant?  That  would 
terrorize  the  wavering  ones  all  the  more.  But  St.  Thomas 
evidently  was  not  thinking  of  the  logical  consequences 
of  his  reasoning.  His  one  aim  was  to  defend  the  criminal 
code  in  vogue  at  the  time.  That  is  his  only  excuse.  For 
we  must  admit  that  rarely  has  his  reasoning  been  so 
faulty  and  so  weak  as  in  his  thesis  upon  the  coercive 
power  of  the  Church,  and  the  punishment  of  heresy. 

•  ••»«•  •  • 

St.  Thomas  defended  the  death  penalty  without  indicat- 
ing how  it  was  to  be  inflicted.  The  commentators  who 
followed  him  were  more  definite.  The  Animadversio  dehita, 
says  Henry  of  Susa  (Hostiensis  +  1271),  in  his  com- 
mentary on  the  bull  Ad  aholendam,  is  the  penalty  of  the 
stake  {ignis  crematio).  He  defends  this  interpretation 
by  quoting  the  words  of  Christ:  "  If  any  one  abide  not  in 
me,  he  shall  be  cast  forth  as  a  branch,  and  shall  wither, 

1  "Sed  quando  recepti  (ab  Ecclesia)  iterum  relabuntur,  videtur  esse  signum 
inconstantiae  eorum;  et  ideo  ulterius  redeuntes  recipiuntur  quidem  ad  picni- 
tentiam,  non  tamen  ut  liberentur  a  sententia  mortis."     Ibid. 


THE   INQUISITION  177 

and  they  shall  gather  him  and  cast  him  into  the  fire,  and  he 
burneth." '^  Jean  d' Andre  (+  1348),  whose  commentary 
carried  equal  weight  with  Henry  of  Susa's  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages,  quotes  the  same  text  as  authority  for 
sending  heretics  to  the  stake.^  According  to  this  peculiar 
exegesis,  the  law  and  custom  of  the  day  merely  sanctioned 
the  law  of  Christ.  To  regard  our  Savior  as  the  precursor 
or  rather  the  author  of  the  criminal  code  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion evidences,  one  must  admit,  a  very  peculiar  temper 
of  mind. 

•  ••«•••• 

The  next  step  was  to  free  the  Church  from  all  responsi- 
bility in  the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  —  truly  an 
extremely  difficult  undertaking. 

St.  Thomas  held,  with  many  other  theologians,  that  her- 
etics condemned  by  the  Inquisition  should  be  abandoned 
to  the  secular  arm,  judicio  sceculari.  But  he  went  further 
and  declared  it  the  duty  of  the  State  to  put  such  criminals 
to  death.^  The  State,  therefore,  was  to  carry  out  this 
sentence  at  least  indirectly  in  the  name  of  the  Church. 

1  John,  XV,  6;  Hostiensis,  on  the  decretal  Ad  abolendum,  cap.  xi,  in 
Eymeric,  Directorhim  inquisitorum,  2*  pars,  pp.    149,  150. 

2  On  the  decretal  Ad  abolendum,  cap.  xiv,  in  Eymeric,  ibid.,  pp.  170,  171. 
Bartolo  says  the  same  of  witches.  "Mulier  striga,  de  qua  agitur,  sive,  latine 
lamia,  debet  tradi  ultimo  supplicio  et  igne  cremari.  Fatetur  enim  Christo  et 
baptismati  renuntiasse;  ergo  debet  mori,  justa  dictum  Domini  nostri  Jesu 
Christi  apud  Joannem,  cap.  xv;  Si  quis  in  me  non  munserit,  etc.  Et  lex 
evangelica  praevalet  omnibus  aiis  legibus,  et  debet  servari  etiam  in  foro  con- 
tentioso."     In  Ziletti,  Consilia  selecta,  1577,  vol.  i,  p.  8. 

^  Summa,  Ila,  Ilae,  qujest.  xi,  art.  3. 

13 


,78  THE   INQUISITION 

A  contemporary  of  St.  Thomas  thus  meets  this  diffi, 
culty:  "The  Pope  does  not  execute  any  one,"  he  says, 
"or  order  him  to  be  put  to  death;  heretics  are  executed 
by  the  law  which  the  Pope  tolerates;  they  practically 
cause  their  own  death  by  committing  crimes  which  merit 
death."  ^  The  heretic  who  received  this  answer  to  his 
objections  must  surely  have  found  it  very  far-fetched. 
He  could  easily  have  replied  that  the  Pope  "not  only 
allowed  heretics  to  be  put  to  death,  but  ordered  this  done 
under  penalty  of  excommunication."  And  by  this  very 
fact  he  incurred  all  the  odium  of  the  death  penalty. 

The  casuists  of  the  Inquisition,  however,  came  to  the 
rescue,  and  tried  to  defend  the  Church  by  another  subter- 
fuge. They  denounced  in  so  many  words  the  death 
penalty  and  other  similar  punishments,  while  at  the  same 
time  they  insisted  upon  the  State's  enforcing  them.  The 
formula  by  which  they  dismissed  an  impenitent  or  a  re- 
lapsed heretic  was  thus  worded:  "We  dismiss  you  from 
our  ecclesiastical  forum,  and  abandon  you  to  the  secular 
arm.  But  we  strongly  beseech  the  secular  court  to  miti- 
gate its  sentence  in  such  a  way  as  to  avoid  bloodshed  or 
danger  of  death."  ^    We  regret  to  state,  however,  that 

i"Papa  noster  non  occidit,  nee  praecipit  aliquem  occidi,  sed  lex  occidit 
quos  papa  permittit  occidi,  et  ipsi  se  occidunt  qui  ea  faciunt  unde  debeant 
occidi."  Disputatio  inter  catholicum  et  Paterinum  hctrcticum,  cap.  xii,  in 
Martfene,  Thesaurus  Anecdotorum,  vol.  v,  col.  1741. 

2"De  foro  nostro  ecclesiastico  te  projicimus  et  tradimus  seu  relinquimus 
brachio  saeculari  ac  potestati  curias  saecularis,  dictam  curiam  scecularem 
eflScaciter  deprecantes  quod  circa  te  citra  sanguinis  effusionem  et   mortis 


THE   INQUISITION  179 

the  civil  judges  were  not  supposed  to  take  these  words 
literally.  If  they  were  at  all  inclined  to  do  so,  they  would 
have  been  quickly  called  to  a  sense  of  their  duty  by  being 
excommunicated.  The  clause  inserted  by  the  canonists 
was  a  mere  legal  fiction,  which  did  not  change  matters  a 
particle. 

It  is  hard  to  understand  why  such  a  formula  was  used 
at  all.  Probably  it  was  first  used  in  other  criminal  cases 
in  which  abandonment  to  the  secular  arm  did  not  imply 
the  death  penalty,'  and  the  Inquisition  kept  using  it 
merely  out  of  respect  to  tradition.     It  seemed  to  palliate 

periculum  sententiam  suam  moderetur."  Forma  tradendi  hcBreticum  per- 
tinacem,  alias  non  relapsum,  curicR  seculari.  Eymeric,  Directorium  inquisi- 
torum,  3*^  pars,  p.  515,  col.  2.  Cf.  Forma  ferendi  sententiam  contra  eum  qui 
in  hctresim  est  relapsus,  sed  pcenitens,  et  ut  relapsus  traditur  curicR  seculari. 
Ibid.,  p.  512,  col.  i;  Forma  tradendi  seu  relinquendi  brachio  scscidari  eum,  qui 
convictus  est  de  hcsresi  per  testes  legitimos,  et  stat  pertinaciter  in  negativa, 
licet  fidem  catholicam  profiteatur,  ibid.,  p.  524,  col.  i.  Bernard  Gui  quotes 
the  Canons  to  justify  this  pretended  appeal  for  clemency:  "Relinquimus 
brachio  et  judicio  curiae  secularis,  eamdem  affectuose  rogantes,  prout  suadent 
canonicae  sanctiones,  quatinus  citra  mortem  et  membrorimi  ejus  mutilationem 
circa  ipsum  suum  judicium  et  suam  sententiam  moderetur  {vel  sic,  quatinus 
vitam  et  membra  sibi  illibata  conservet).  Practica  inquisitionis,  ed.  Douais, 
p.  127;  cf.  pp.  128,  133-136;  cf.  Limborch,  Historia  inquisitionis,  pp.  289- 
291.  The  CanoniccB  Sanctiones,  to  which  Bernard  Gui  refers,  are  undoubtedly 
the  decretal  Novimus,  which  we  will  quote  in  the  following  note,  and  the 
bull  Ad  aboldendam  of  Innocent  IV. 

1  Cf.  the  decretal  Novimus,  in  the  Decretals,  cap.  27,  lib.  v,  tit.  xl; 
"Et  sic  intelligitur  tradi  curiae  seculari,  pro  quo  tamen  debet  Ecclesia  efEca- 
citer  intercedere,  ut  citra  mortis  periculum  circa  eum  sententia  moderetur." 
Cf.  also  lib.  ii,  tit.  i,  cap.  10,  Cum  ab  homine :  "Cum  Ecclesia  non  habeat 
ultra  quid  faciat,  ne  possit  esse  ultra  perditio  plurimorum,  per  secularem 
comprimendus  est  potestatem,  ita  quod  ei  deputetur  exilium,  vel  alia  legitima 
paena  inferatur."  This  law  dealt  with  degraded  clerics  and  forgers  aban- 
doned to  the  secular  arm. 


,8o  THE   INQUISITION 

the  too  flagrant  contradiction  which  existed  between 
ecclesiastical  justice  and  the  teaching  of  Christ,  and  it 
gave  at  least  an  external  homage  to  the  teaching  of  St. 
Augustine,  and  the  first  fathers  of  the  Church.  More- 
over, as  it  furnished  a  specious  means  of  evading  by  the 
merest  form  the  prohibition  against  clerics  taking  part 
in  sentences  involving  the  effusion  of  blood  and  death, 
and  the  irregularity  resulting  therefrom,  the  Inquisitors 
used  it  to  reassure  their  conscience. 

Finally,  however,  some  Inquisitors,  realizing  the  empti- 
ness of  this  formula,  dispensed  with  it  altogether,  and 
boldly  assumed  the  full  responsibility  for  their  sentences. 
They  deemed  the  role  of  the  State  so  unimportant  in  the 
execution  of  heretics,  that  they  did  not  even  mention  it. 
The  Inquisition  is  the  real  judge;  it  lights  the  fires.  "All 
whom  we  cause  to  be  burned,"  says  the  famous  Dominican 
Sprenger  in  his  Malleus  Maleficarum}  Although  not 
intended  as  an  accurate  statement  of  fact,-  it  indicates 

1  "  Experientia  nos  saepe  docuit,  cum  omnes  quas  incinerari  fecimus  ex 
eorum  confessionibus  patuit,  ipsas  fuisse  involuntarias  circa  maleficia  in- 
ferenda,"  etc.  Malleus  maleficarum  maleficas  el  earum  haresitn  framea 
conterens,  auct.  Jacobo  Sprengero,  Lugduni,  1660,  pars  ii,  quaest.  i,  cap.  ii, 
p.  108,  col.  2.  The  author  quotes  the  Formicarium  de  malejicis  et  eorum 
prcEstigiis  ac  deceptionihus  of  the  famous  Jean  Nider,  who  "recitat  hoc  ex 
inquisitore  Eduensis  dioecesis,  qui  etiam  in  ipsa  dioecesi  multos  de  maleficiis 
reos  inquisierat  et  incinerari  fecerat."  Ibid.,  p.  106,  col.  2.  He  also  speaks 
of  the  Inquisitor  Cumanus  who,  in  1485,  "uno  anno  quadraginta  et  unam 
maleficam  incinerari  fecit,^'  ibid.,  p.  105,  col.  2. 

2  We  must  interpret  in  the  same  sense  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance pronouncing  the  penalty  of  the  stake  against  the  followers  of  John 
Huss,  John  Wyclif  and   Jerome  of  Prague:  "Ut  omnes  et  singuli  spirituales 


THE   INQUISITION  i8r 

pretty  well  the  current  idea  regarding  the  share  of  the 
ecclesiastical  tribunals  in  the  punishment  of  heretics. 
•  *•••••• 

It  is  evident  that  the  theologians  and  canonists  were 
simply  apologists  for  the  Inquisition,  and  interpreters  of 
its  laws.  As  a  rule,  they  tried,  like  St.  Raymond  Penna- 
fort  and  St.  Thomas,  to  defend  the  decrees  of  the  Popes. 
We  cannot  say  that  they  succeeded  in  their  task.  Some 
by  their  untimely  zeal  rather  compromised  the  cause  they 
endeavored  to  defend.  Others,  going  counter  to  the 
canon  law,  drew  conclusions  from  it  that  the  Popes  never 
dreamed  of,  and  in  this  way  made  the  procedure  of  the 
Inquisition,  already  severe  enough,  still  more  severe, 
especially  in  the  use  of  torture. 

et  seculares  qui  errores  vel  haereses  Johannis  Huss  et  Joannis  Wiclif  in  sacro 
hoc  concilio  condemnatos  praedicant,  dogmatizant  vel  defendunt;  et  personas 
Joannis  Huss  et  Hieronymi  catholicas  et  sanctas  pronuntiant  vel  tenent,  et 
de  hoc  convicti  fuerint,  tanquam  haeretici  relapsi  puniantur  ad  ignem." 
Session  xliv,  no.  23,  Harduin,  Concilia,  vol.  viii,  col.  896  et  seq.  The  Council 
here  indicates  only  the  usual  punishment  for  the  relapsed,  without  really 
decreeing  it.  This  is  evident  from  the  vi^ords  used  in  the  condemnation  of 
John  Huss:  "Haec  sancta  synodus  Joannem  Huss,  attento  quod  Ecclesia  Dei 
non  haheat  ultra  quid  agere  valeat,  judicio  stBculari  relinquit  et  ipsum  curiae 
secular!  relinquendum  fore  decernit."     Ibid.,  col.  410,  sessio  xv,  anno  1415. 


CHAPTER    IX 
The  Inquisition  in  Operation 

We  do  not  intend  to  relate  every  detail  of  the  In- 
quisition's action.  A  brief  outline,  a  sort  of  bird's- 
eye  view,  will  suffice. 

-Its  field,  although  very  extensive,  did  not  comprise 
the  whole  of  Christendom,  nor  even  all  the  Latin  countries. 
The  Scandinavian  kingdoms  escaped  it  almost  entirely; 
England  experienced  it  only  once  in  the  case  of  the  Tem- 
plars; Castile  and  Portugal  knew  nothing  of  it  before  the 
reign  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella.  It  was  almost  unknown 
in  France  —  at  least  as  an  established  institution  — 
except  in  the  South,  in  what  was  called  the  county  of 
Toulouse,  and  later  on  in  Languedoc. 

The  Inquisition  was  in  full  operation  in  Aragon.  The 
Cathari,  it  seems,  were  wont  to  travel  frequently  from 
Languedoc  to  Lombardy,  so  that  upper  Italy  had  from 
an  early  period  its  contingent  of  Inquisitors.  Frederic 
II  had  it  established  in  the  two  Sicilies  and  in  many  cities 
of  Italy  and  Germany.^  Honorius  IV  (1285- 1287)  intro- 
duced it  into  Sardinia.^     Its  activity  in   Flanders  and 

^  On  the  spread  of  the  Inquisition,  cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  passim. 
^Potthast,  no.   22307;  Registres  cTHonorius  IV,   published  by  Maurice 
Prou,  1888,  no.  163. 

182 


THE   INQUISITION  183 

Bohemia  in  the  fifteenth  century  was  very  considerable. 
These  were  the  chief  centers  of  its  operations. 

Some  of  the  Inquisitors  had  an  exalted  idea  of  their 
office.  We  recall  the  ideal  portrait  of  the  perfect  In- 
quisitor drawn  by  Bernard  Gui  and  Eymeric.  But  by 
an  inevitable  law  of  history  the  reality  never  comes  up 
to  the  ideal. 

We  know  the  names  of  many  Inquisitors,  monks  and 
bishops.^  There  are  some  whose  memory  is  beyond 
reproach;  in  fact  the  Church  honors  them  as  saints, 
because  they  died  for  the  faith.^ 

But  others  fulfilled  the  duties  of  their  ofifice  in  a 
spirit  of  hatred  and  impatience,  contrary  both  to  nat- 
ural justice  and  to  Christian  charity.  Who  can  help 
denouncing,  for  instance,  the  outrageous  conduct  of 
Conrad  of  Marburg.  Contemporary  writers  tell  us  that 
when  heretics  appeared  before  his  tribunal,  he  granted 
them  no  delay,  but  at  once  required  them  to  answer  yes 
or  no  to  the  accusations  against  them.  If  they  confessed 
their  guilt,  they  were  granted  their  lives,  and  thrown  into 
prison ;  if  they  refused  to  confess,  they  were  at  once  con- 
demned and  sent  to  the  stake.^  Such  summary  justice 
strongly  resembles  injustice. 

1  Mgr.  Douais,  for  example,  gives  a  list,  with  biographical  notes,  of  the 
Inquisitors  of  Toulouse  from  1229  to  1329.    Documents,  vol.  i,  pp.  cxxix-ccix. 

"^v.g.  Peter  of  Verona,  assassinated  by  heretics  in  1252.  Cf.  Lea,  op.  ciL, 
vol.  2,  p.  215. 

3  "Si  testes,  qui  se  confitebantur  aliquantulum  criminis  eorum  conscios  et 


,84  THE   INQUISITION 

But  Robert  the  Dominican,  known  as  Robert  the  Bugre, 
for  he  was  a  converted  Patarin,  surpassed  even  Conrad 
in  cruelty.  Among  the  exploits  of  this  Inquisitor  special 
mention  must  be  made  of  the  executions  at  Montwimer 
in  Champagne.  The  Bishop,  Moranis,  had  allowed  a  large 
community  of  heretics  to  grow  up  about  him.  Robert 
determined  to  punish  the  town  severely.  In  one  week 
he  managed  to  try  all  his  prisoners.  On  May  29,  1239, 
about  one  hundred  and  eighty  of  them,  with  their  bishop, 
were  sent  to  the  stake.  Such  summary  proceedings  caused 
complaints  to  be  sent  to  Rome  against  this  cruel  Inquisitor. 
He  was  accused  of  confounding  in  his  blind  fanaticism 
the  innocent  with  the  guilty,  and  of  working  upon  simple 
souls  so  as  to  increase  the  number  of  his  victims.  An 
investigation  proved  that  these  complaints  were  well 
founded.  In  fact  it  revealed  such  outrages  that  Robert 
the  Bugre  was  at  first  suspended  from  his  office,  and 
finally  condemned  to  perpetual  imprisonment.^ 

participes,  in  illorum  absentia  reciperentur  ct  dictis  eorum  simpliciter  cre- 
deretur,  ita  ut  accusatis  talis  daretur  optio,  aut  sponte  confiteri  et  vivere 
aut  innocentiam  jurare  et  statim  mori."  Testimony  of  the  Archbishop  of 
Mainz  and  Bernard  the  Dominican  in  Aubri  des  Trois-Fontaines,  Mon. 
Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii,  p.  931.  "Ut  nullius,  qui  tantum  propalatus  esset, 
accusatio  vel  recusatio,  nullius  exceptio  vel  testimonium  admitteretur,  nee 
ullus  defendendi  locus  daretur,  sed  nee  induciae  deliberation  is  darentur,  sed 
in  continenti  oportebat  eum  vel  reum  se  confiteri  et  in  pocnitentiam  recalvari, 
vel  crimen  negare  et  cremari."  Gesta  Trevirens  in  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xiv, 
p.  400. 

1  Aubri  des  Trois  Fontaines,  ad  ann.  1239,  Mon.  Germ.  SS.,  vol.  xxiii, 
944,  945;  Chronique  of  Mathieu  Paris  in  Raynaldi,  Annates  eccles.,  ad  ann. 
1238,  no.  52;  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  114-117. 


THE    INQUISITION  185 

Other  acts  of  the  Inquisition  were  no  less  odious.  In 
1280  the  Consuls  of  Carcassonne  complained  to  the 
Pope,  the  King  of  France,  and  the  episcopal  vicars  of 
the  diocese  of  the  cruelty  and  injustice  of  Jean  Galand 
in  the  use  of  torture.  He  had  inscribed  on  the  walls  of 
the  Inquisition  these  words:  domunculas  ad  torquendum  et 
cruciandum  homines  diversis  generibus  tormentorum.  Some 
prisoners  had  been  tortured  on  the  rack,  and  most  of  them 
were  so  cruelly  treated  that  they  lost  the  use  of  their 
arms  and  legs,  and  became  altogether  helpless.  Some 
even  died  in  great  agony  of  their  torments.^  The  com- 
plaint continues  in  this  tone,  and  mentions  five  or  six 
times  the  great  cruelty  of  the  tortures  inflicted. 

Philip  the  Fair,  who  was  noble-hearted  occasionally, 
addressed  a  letter  May  13,  1291,  to  the  seneschal  of  Car- 
cassonne in  which  he  denounced  the  Inquisitors  for  their 
cruel  torturing  of  innocent  men,  whereby  the  living  and 
the  dead  were  fraudulently  convicted;  and  among  other 
abuses,  he  mentions  particularly  ''tortures  newly  in- 
vented." ^    Another  letter  of   his    (1301),  addressed    to 

1  Nonnulli  vero  ponuntur  in  eqiiuleis,  in  quibus  quamplurimi  per  tormen- 
torum acerhitatem  corporis  destituuntur  memhris  et  impotentes  redduntur 
omnino.  Nonnulli  etiam  propter  impatientiam  et  dolorem  nimium  morte 
crudelissima  finiunt  dies  suos.  Vidal,  Jean  Galand  et  les  Carcassonnais, 
Paris,  Picard,  1903,  p.  32,  no.  2;  cf.  p.  40,  nos.  3-5;  p.  41,  no.  9;  Le  Tribunal 
d' inquisition  de  Pamiers,  loc  cit.,  1905,  pp.  151,  152. 

2"Certiorati  per  aliquos  fide  dignos  .  .  .  eo  quod  innocentes  puniant, 
incarcerent  et  multa  gravamina  eis  inferant  et  per  qucedam  tormenta  de  novo 
exquisita  multas  falsitates  .  .  .  extorqueant."  Histoire  de  Languedoc,  vol.  x, 
Preuves,  col.  273. 


i86  THE   INQUISITION 

Foulques  de  Saint-Georges,  contained  a  similar  denunci- 
ation.* 

In  a  bull  intended  for  Cardinals  Taillefer  de  la  Chap- 
pelle  and  Berenger  de  Fredol,  March  13,  1306,  Clement 
V  mentions  the  complaints  of  the  citizens  of  Carcassonne, 
Albi,  and  Cordes,  regarding  the  cruelty  practiced  in  the 
prisons  of  the  Inquisition.  Several  of  these  unfortunates 
"were  so  weakened  by  the  rigors  of  their  imprisonment, 
the  lack  of  food,  and  the  severity  of  their  tortures 
{sevitia  tormentorum) ,  that  they  died."^ 

The  facts  in  Savonarola's  case  are  very  hard  to  deter- 
mine. The  official  account  of  his  interrogatory  declares 
that  he  was  subjected  to  three  and  a  half  tratti  di  June. 
This  was  a  form  of  torture  known  as  the  strappado.  The 
Signoria,  in  answer  to  the  reproaches  of  Alexander  VI  at 
their  tardiness,  declared  that  they  had  to  deal  with  a  man 
of  great  endurance;  that  they  had  assiduously  tortured 
him  for  many  days  with  slender  results.^  Burchard,  the 
papal  prothonotary,  states  that  he  was  put  to  the  tor- 
ture seven  times.^     It  made  very  little  difference  whether 

i"A  captionibus,  qucBstionihus  et    inexcogitatis  tormentis  incipiens  .  .  . 
vi  et  metu  tormentorum^  fateri  compellit."     Histoire  du  Languedoc,  vol.  x, 
Preuves,  col.  379. 

2"Adeo  gravantur  et  hactenus  sunt  gravati  carceris  angustia,  lectorum 
inedia,  et  victualium  penuria,  et  sevitia  tormentorum,  quod  spiritum  reddere 
sunt  coacti."     Douais,  Documents,  vol.  ii,  p.  307. 

3"Multa  et  assidua  quaestione,  multis  diebus,  per  vim  vix  pauca  extorsi- 
mus,"  etc.  Villari,  La  storia  di  Girolamo  Savonarola,  Firenze,  1887,  vol.  ii, 
p.  197. 

*  Diarium  in  Memoires  de  Commynes,  Preuves,  Bruxelles,  1706,  p.  424. 


THE   INQUISITION  187 

these  tortures  were  inflicted  per  modum  continuationis  or 
per  modum  iterationis,  as  the  casuists  of  the  Inquisition 
put  it.     At  any  rate,  it  was  a  crying  abuse. ^ 

We  may  learn  something  of  the  brutality  of  the  Inquisi- 
tors from  the  remorse  felt  by  one  of  them.  He  had 
inflicted  the  torture  of  the  burning  coals  upon  a  sorceress, 
The  unfortunate  woman  died  soon  afterwards  in  prison 
as  a  result  of  her  torments.  The  Inquisitor,  knowing  he 
had  caused  her  death,  wrote  John  XXII  for  a  dispensa- 
tion from  the  irregularity  he  had  thereby  incurred.^ 

But  the  greatest  excesses  of  the  Inquisition  were  due 
to  the  political  schemes  of  sovereigns.  Such  instances 
were  by  no  means  rare.  Hardly  had  the  Inquisition  been 
established,  when  Frederic  II  tried  to  use  it  for  political 
purposes.  He  was  anxious  to  put  the  prosecution  for 
heresy  in  the  hands  of  his  royal  officers,  rather  than  in  the 
hands  of  the  bishops  and  the  monks.  When,  therefore, 
in  1233,  he  boasted  in  a  letter  to  Gregory  IX  that  he  had 
put  to  death  a  great  number  of  heretics  in  his  kingdom, 
the  Pope  answered  that  he  was  not  at  all  deceived  by 
this  pretended  zeal.^     He  knew  full  well  that  the  Em- 

1  On  this  question,  cf.  Lea,  op.  cii.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  229,  230  and  notes.  Read 
a  recent  work  of  H.  Lucas,  Fra  Girolamo  Savonarola,  a  biographical  study, 
London,  Sands,  1905. 

2  "Fecisti  plantas  pedum  ejusdem  mulieris  juxta  carbones  accensos  apponi, 
quje  ipsorum  calorem  sentiens,"  etc.,  Document  quoted  par  Vidal,  Le  tribunal 
d'Inquisition  de  Pamiers,  loc.  cit.,  October,  1905,  p.  5. 

3  Cf.  Huillard-BreoUes,  Historic  diplomatica  Frederici  II,  vol.  iv,  p.  462; 
of.  pp.  435.  444- 


,88  THE    INQUISITION 

peror  wished  simply  to  get  rid  of  his  personal  enemies, 
and  that  he  had  put  to  death  many  who  were  not  heretics 

at  all. 

The  personal  interests  of  Philip  the  Fair  were  chiefly 
responsible  for  the  trial  and  condemnation  of  the  Tem- 
plars. Clement  V  himself  and  the  ecclesiastical  judges 
were  both  unfortunately  guilty  of  truckling  in  the  whole 
affair.  But  their  unjust  condemnation  was  due  chiefly 
to  the  king's  desire  to  confiscate  their  great  possessions.^ 

Joan  of  Arc  was  also  a  victim  demanded  by  the  political 
interests  of  the  day.  If  the  Bishop  of  Beauvais,  Pierre 
Cauchon,  had  not  been  such  a  bitter  English  partisan,  it 
is  very  probable  that  the  tribunal  over  which  he  presided 
would  not  have  brought  in  the  verdict  of  guilty,  which 
sent  her  to  the  stake  ;^  she  would  never  have  been  con- 
sidered a  heretic  at  all,  much  less  a  relapsed  one. 

1  The  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition  were  perhaps  never  more  cruel  than 
in  the  case  of  the  Templars.  At  Paris,  accordhig  to  the  testimony  of 
Ponsard  de  Gisiac,  thirty-six  Templars  perished  under  torture.  At  Sens, 
Jacques  de  Saciac  said  that  twenty-five  had  died  of  torment  and  suffering. 
(Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii,  p.  262.)  The  Grand  Master,  Jaques  Molay,  owed  his 
life  to  the  vigor  of  his  constitution.  Confessions  extorted  by  such  means 
were  altogether  valueless.  Despite  all  his  efforts,  Philip  the  Fair  never 
succeeded  in  obtaining  a  formal  condemnation  of  the  Order.  In  his  bull  of 
July  22,  1773,  Clement  XIV  says:  "Etiamsi  concilium  generale  Viennese, 
cui  negotium  examinandum  commiserat,  a  formali  et  definitiva  sententia 
ferenda  consuerit  se  abstinere."  Bullarium  Romanum,  Continuatio,  Prati, 
1847,  vol.  V,  p.  620.  On  the  trial  of  the  Templars,  cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii, 
pp.  249-320;  Langlois,  Histoire  de  France,  vol.  iii,  2^  partie,  1901. 

2  The  greatest  crime  of  the  trial  was  the  substitution,  in  the  documents,  of 
a  different  form  of  abjuration  from  the  one  Joan  read  near  the  church  of 
Saint-Ouen, 


THE   INQUISITION  189 

It  would  be  easy  to  cite  many  instances  of  the  same 
kind,  especially  in  Spain.  If  there  was  any  place  in  the 
world  where  the  State  interfered  unjustly  in  the  trials 
of  the  Inquisition,  it  was  in  the  kingdom  of  Ferdinand 
and  Isabella,  the  kingdom  of  Philip  11.^ 

From  all  that  has  been  said,  we  must  not  infer  that  the 
tribunals  of  the  Inquisition  were  always  guilty  of  cruelty 
and  injustice;  we  ought  simply  to  conclude  that  too  fre- 
quently they  were.  Even  one  case  of  brutality  and 
injustice  deserves  perpetual  odium. 

The  severest  penalties  the  Inquisition  could  inflict  (apart 
from  the  minor  penalties  of  pilgrimages,  wearing  the 
crosses,  etc.),  were  imprisonment,  abandonment  to  the 
secular  arm,  and  confiscation  of  property. 

''Imprisonment,  according  to  the  theory  of  the  In- 
quisition, was  not  a  punishment,  but  a  means  by  which 
the  penitent  could  obtain,  on  the  bread  of  tribulation 
and  the  water  of  affliction,  pardon  from  God  for  his  sins, 
while  at  the  same  time  he  was  closely  supervised  to  see 
that  he  persevered  in  the  right  path,  and  was  segregated 

^  The  complaints  of  various  Popes  prove  this.  Cf.  Hefele,  Le  cardinal 
Ximenes,  Paris,  1857,  pp.  265-374.  On  the  Spanish  Inquisition  consult  with 
due  precaution  Uhistoire  de  r Inquisition  d'Espagne,  by  Llorente,  181 7,  and  the 
following  works  of  Lea :  Chapters  from  the  religious  history  of  Spain  cofinected 
with  the  Inquisition  (Philadelphia,  1890)  and  The  Moriscos  of  Spain  (Phila- 
delphia, 1901).  Cf.  Ch.  v.  Langlois,  L' Inquisition  d'apres  les  travaux  recents, 
Paris,  igo2,  pp.  89-141;  Bernaldez,  Historia  de  los  Reyes:  Cronicas  de  las 
reyes  de  Castilla,  Fernandez  y  Isabel,  Madrid,  1878;  Rodrigo,  Historia  ver- 
dadera  de  la  Inquisicion,  3  vol.,  Madrid,  1876-1877. 


190 


THE    INQUISITION 


from  the  rest  of  the  flock,  thus  removing  all  danger  of 
infection."  ^ 

Heretics  who  confessed  their  errors  during  the  time  of 
grace  were  imprisoned  only  for  a  short  time;  those  who 
confessed  under  torture  or  under  threat  of  death  were 
imprisoned  for  life;  this  was  the  usual  punishment  for 
the  relapsed  during  most  of  the  thirteenth  century.  It 
was  the  only  penalty  that  Bernard  of  Caux  (1244- 1248) 
inflicted  upon  them. 

"There  were  two  kinds  of  imprisonment,"  writes  Lea, 
"the  milder  or  murus  largus,  and  the  harsher,  known  as 
murus  stridus,  or  durus,  or  arctus.  All  were  on  bread 
and  water,  and  the  confinement,  according  to  rule,  was 
solitary,  each  penitent  in  a  separate  cell,  with  no  access 
allowed  to  him,  to  prevent  his  being  corrupted,  or  cor- 
rupting others;  but  this  could  not  be  strictly  enforced, 
and  about  1306  Geoff roi  d'Ablis  stigmatizes  as  an  abuse 
the  visits  of  clergy  and  the  laity  of  both  sexes,  permitted 
to  prisoners."  ^ 

As  far  back  as  1282,  Jean  Galand  had  forbidden  the 
jailer  of  the  prison  of  Carcassonne  to  eat  or  take  recrea- 
tion with  the  prisoners,  or  to  allow  them  to  take  recreation, 
or  to  keep  servants.^ 

Husband  and  wife,  however,  were  allowed  access  to 
each  other  if  either  or  both  were  imprisoned;  and  late 

^  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  484. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  486,  487. 

2  Collection,  Doat,  vol.  xxxii,  fol.  i,  25. 


THE    INQUISITION  iqi 

in  the  fourteenth  century  Eymeric  declared  that  zealous 
Catholics  might  be  admitted  to  visit  prisoners,  but  not 
women  and  simple  folk  who  might  be  perverted,  for  con- 
verted prisoners,  he  added,  were  very  liable  to  relapse,  and 
to  infect  others,  and  usually  died  at  the  stake. ^ 

*'In  the  milder  form  or  mums  largus,  the  prisoners 
apparently  were,  if  well  behaved,  allowed  to  take  exer- 
cise in  the  corridors,  where  sometimes  they  had  op- 
portunities of  converse  with  each  other,  and  with  the 
outside  world.  This  privilege  was  ordered  to  be  given  to 
the  aged  and  infirm  by  the  cardinals  who  investigated  the 
prison  of  Carcassonne,  and  took  measures  to  alleviate 
its  rigors.  In  the  harsher  confinement,  or  murus  stridus, 
the  prisoner  was  thrust  into  the  smallest,  darkest,  and 
most  noisome  of  cells,  with  chains  on  his  feet,  —  in  some 
cases  chained  to  the  wall.  This  penance  was  inflicted 
on  those  whose  oflFences  had  been  conspicuous,  or  who  had 
perjured  themselves  by  making  incomplete  confessions, 
the  matter  being  wholly  at  the  discretion  of  the  Inquisitor. 
I  have  met  with  one  case,  in  1328,  of  aggravated  false- 
witness,  condemned  to  the  murus  strictissimus,  with  chains 
on  both  hands  and  feet.  When  the  culprits  were  mem- 
bers of  a  religious  order,  to  avoid  scandal  the  proceedings 
were  usually  held  in  private,  and  the  imprisonment  would 
be  ordered  to  take  place  in  a  convent  of  their  own  order. 
As  these  buildings,  however,  were  unprovided  with  cells 

1  Eymeric,  Directorium,  p.  507. 


192  THE   INQUISITION 

for  the  punishment  of  offenders,  this  was  probably  of 
no  great  advantage  to  the  victim.  In  the  case  of  Jeanne, 
widow  of  B.  de  la  Tour,  a  nun  of  Lespinasse,  in  1246,  who 
had  committed  acts  of  both  Catharan  and  Waldensian 
heresy,  and  had  prevaricated  in  her  confession,  the  sen- 
tence was  confinement  in  a  separate  cell  in  her  own 
convent,  where  no  one  was  to  enter  or  see  her,  her  food 
being  pushed  in  through  an  opening  left  for  the  purpose 
—  in  fact,  the  living  tomb  known  as  the  in  pace.''  ^ 

In  these  wretched  prisons  the  diet  was  most  meager. 
But  "while  the  penance  prescribed  was  a  diet  of  bread 
and  water,  the  Inquisition,  with  unwonted  kindness,  did 
not  object  to  its  prisoners  receiving  from  their  friends 
contributions  of  food,  wine,  money,  and  garments,  and 
among  its  documents  are  such  frequent  allusions  to  this 
that  it  may  be  regarded  as  an  established  custom."  ^ 

The  number  of  prisoners  even  with  a  life  sentence 
was  rather  considerable.  The  collections  of  sentences 
that  we  possess  give  us  precise  information  on  this 
point. 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  487.  The  in  pace  was  a  frightful  punishment. 
In  1350  the  Archbishop  of  Toulouse  besought  King  John  to  mitigate  its 
severity,  and  he  consequently  issued  an  Ordonnance  that  the  superior  of  the 
convent  should  twice  a  month  visit  and  console  the  prisoner,  who  moreover 
should  have  the  right  twice  a  month  to  ask  for  the  company  of  one  of  the 
monks.  Even  this  slender  innovation  provoked  the  bitterest  resistance  (  ?)  of 
the  Dominicans  and  Franciscans,  who  appealed  to  Pope  Clement  VI,  but  in 
vain.  Lea,  vol.  i,  p.  488,  note;  Vassete,  Histoire  du  Languedoc,  vol.  iv, 
Preuves,  p.  29. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  491, 


THE    INQUISITION  193 

We  have,  for  instance,  the  register  of  Bernard  of  Caux, 
the  Inquisitor  of  Toulouse  for  the  years  1244- 1246.  Out 
of  fifty-two  of  his  sentences,  twenty-seven  heretics  were 
sentenced  to  life  imprisonment.  We  must  not  forget  also 
that  several  of  them  contain  condemnations  of  many 
individuals;  the  second,  for  instance,  condemned  thirty- 
three  persons,  twelve  of  whom  were  to  be  imprisoned 
for  life;  the  fourth  condemned  eighteen  persons  to  life 
imprisonment.  On  the  other  hand,  the  register  does  not 
record  one  case  of  abandonment  to  the  secular  arm,  even 
for  relapse  into  heresy.^ 

Bernard  must  be  considered  a  severe  Inquisitor.  The 
register  of  the  notary  of  Carcassonne,  published  by  Mgr. 
Douais,  contains  for  the  years  1249- 125 5  two  hundred  and 
seventy-eight  articles.  But  imprisonment  very  rarely 
figured  among  the  penances  inflicted.  The  usual  penalty 
was  enforced  service  in  the  Holy  Land,  passagium,  transi- 
tus  ultramarinus? 

Bernard  Gui,  Inquisitor  at  Toulouse  for  seventeen 
years  (i 308-1 325),  was  called  upon  to  condemn  nine 
hundred  and  thirty  heretics,  of  whom  two  were  guilty 
of  false  witness,  eighty-nine  were  dead,  and  forty 
were  fugitives.  In  the  eighteen  Sermones  or  Autos 
de  je  in  which  he  rendered  the  sentences  we  possess  to- 
day, he  condemned  three  hundred  and  seven  to  prison, 

1  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  pp.  cclx-cclxi;  vol.  ii,  pp.  i-89. 

2  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  pp.  cclxvii-cclxxxiv;  vol.  ii,  pp.  115,  243. 

14 


194  ™E   INQUISITION 

i.e.  about  one  third  of  all  the  heretics  brought  before 
his  tribunal.^ 

The  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition  of  Pamiers  in  the  Ser- 
mones  of  13 18-1324,  held  ninety-eight  heresy  trials.  The 
records  declare  that  two  were  acquitted;  and  say  nothing 
of  the  penalty  inflicted  upon  twenty-one  others  who  were 
tried.  The  most  common  penalty  was  life-imprisonment. 
In  the  Sermo  of  March  8,  thirteen  heretics  were  sentenced 
to  prison,  eight  of  whom  were  set  at  liberty  on  July  4, 
1322;  these  latter  were  condemned  to  wear  single  or  double 
crosses.  Six  out  of  ten,  tried  on  August  2,  1321,  were 
sentenced  for  life  to  the  German  prison.  On  June  19, 
1323,  six  out  of  ten  tried  were  condemned  to  prison  (murus 
stridus);  on  August  12,  1324,  ten  out  of  eleven  tried  were 
condemned  for  life  to  the  strict  prison:  ad  strictum  murt 
Carcassonne  inquisitionis  carcerem  in  vinculis  ferreis  ac  in 
pane  ei  aqua?  We  gather  from  these  statistics  that  the 
Inquisition  of  Pamiers  inflicted  the  penalty  of  life  im- 
prisonment as  often  as,  if  not  more  than,  the  Inquisition 
of  Toulouse. 

We  have  seen  above  that  the  penalty  of  imprisonment 
was  sometimes  mitigated  and  even  commuted.  Life  im- 
prisonment was  sometimes  commuted  into  temporary 
imprisonment,  and  both  into  pilgrimages  or  wearing  the 

1  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  pp.  ccv.,  cf.  Appendix  B. 
Note  that  the  register  records  930  condemnations.     Cf.   Lea,  op.   cit.y 
vol.  i,  p.  550. 

2Vidal,  op.  cit.,  April,  1905,  pp.  313-321. 


THE    INQUISITION  195 

cross.  Twenty,  imprisoned  by  the  Inquisition  of  Pamiers, 
were  set  at  liberty  on  condition  that  they  wore  the  cross. ^ 
This  clemency  was  not  peculiar  to  the  Inquisition  of 
Pamiers.  In  1328,  by  a  single  sentence,  twenty-three 
prisoners  of  Carcassonne  were  set  at  liberty,  and  other 
slight  penances  substituted. 

In  Bernard  Gui's  register  of  sentences  we  read  of  one  hun- 
dred and  nineteen  cases  of  release  from  prison  with  the  obli- 
gation to  wear  the  cross,  and  of  this  number,  fifty-one  were 
subsequently  released  from  even  the  minor  penalty .^  Pris- 
oners were  sometimes  set  at  liberty  on  account  of  sickness, 
v.g.  women  with  child,  or  to  provide  for  their  families. 

"In  1246  we  fmd  Bernard  de  Caux,  in  sentencing  Ber- 
nard Sabbatier,  a  relapsed  heretic,  to  perpetual  imprison- 
ment, adding  that  as  the  culprit's  father  is  a  good  Catholic, 
and  old  and  sick,  the  son  may  remain  with  him,  and  sup- 
port him  as  long  as  he  lives,  meanwhile  wearing  the 
crosses."  ^ 

Assuredly  this  penalty  of  imprisonment  was  terrible, 
but  while  we  may  denounce  some  Inquisitors  for  having 
made  its  suffering  more  intense  out  of  malice  or  indiffer- 
ence,'' we  must  also  admit  that  others  sometimes  mitigated 
its  severity. 


1  Vidal,  op.  cit.,  July,  1905,  p.  376. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  495. 

3  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  486. 

<  Recall  what  was  said  above,  and  the  reforms  of  Clement  V. 


,q6  the  inquisition 

The  condemnation  of  obstinate  heretics,  and  later  on, 
of  the  relapsed,  permitted  no  exercise  of  clemency.  How 
many  heretics  were  abandoned  to  the  secular  arm,  and 
thus  sent  to  the  stake,  is  impossible  to  determine.  How- 
ever, we  have  some  interesting  statistics  of  the  more  im- 
portant tribunals  on  this  point.  The  portion  of  the  regis- 
ter of  Bernard  de  Caux  which  relates  to  impenitent  her- 
etics has  been  lost,  but  we  have  the  sentences  of 
the  Inquisition  of  Pamiers  (13 18-1324),  and  of  Toulouse 
(1308- 1 323.)  In  nine  Sermones  or  autos  de  fe^  of  the 
tribunal  of  Pamiers,  condemning  sixty-four  persons,  only 
five  heretics  were  abandoned  to  the  secular  arm.^ 

Bernard  Gui  presided  over  eighteen  autos  de  ]e,  and 
condemned  nine  hundred  and  thirty  heretics;  and  yet 
he  abandoned  only  forty-two  to  the  secular  arm.^  These 
Inquisitors  were  far  more  lenient  than  Robert  the  Bougre. 
Taking  all  in  all,  the  Inquisition  in  its  operation  denoted 
a  real  progress  in  the  treatment  of  criminals;  for  it  not 
only  put  an  end  to  the  summary  vengeance  of  the  mob, 
but  it  diminished  considerably  the  number  of  those  sen- 
tenced to  death.^ 


1  The  Sermo  generalis  after  which  the  sentences  were  solemnly  pronounced 
by  the  Inquisitors  was  called  in  Spain  auto  de  }e. 

2  Cf.  Vidal,  op.  cit.,  July,  1905,  p.  369. 

3  Cf.  The  sentences  of  Bernard  Gui  in  Douais,  Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  ccv, 
and  Appendix  B. 

^  Even  while  the  Inquisition  was  in  full  operation,  the  heretics  who  managed 
to  escape  the  ecclesiastical  tribunals  had  no  reason  to  congratulate  them- 
selves.    For  we  read  that  Raymond  VII,  Count  of  Toulouse  in  1248,  caused 


THE    INQUISITION  197 

We  notice  at  Pamiers  that  only  one  out  of  thirteen, 
while  at  Toulouse  but  one  in  twenty-two,  was  sentenced 
to  death.  Although  terrible  enough,  these  figures  are 
far  different  from  the  exaggerated  statistics  imagined  by 
the  fertile  brains  of  ignorant  controversialists.^ 

It  is  true  that  many  writers  are  haunted  by  the  cruelty 
of  the  Spanish  or  German  tribunals  which  sent  to  the 
stake  a  great  number  of  victims,  i.e.  conversos  and  witches. 

From  the  very  beginning,  the  Spanish  Inquisition 
acted  with  the  utmost  severity.  "Twelve  hundred  con- 
versos, penitents,  obdurate  and  relapsed  heretics  were 
present  at  the  auto  de  fe  in  Toledo,  March,  1487;  and, 
according  to  the  most  conservative  estimate,  Torquemada 
sent  to  the  stake  about  two  thousand  heretics "  ^  in 
twelve  years. 

eighty  heretics  to  be  burned  at  Berlaiges,  near  Agen,  after  they  had  confessed 
in  his  presence,  without  giving  them  the  opportunity  of  recanting.  As  Lea 
says:  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  537,  "From  the  contemporary  sentences  of  Bernard 
of  Caux,  it  is  probable  that,  had  these  unfortunates  been  tried  before  that 
ardent  champion  of  the  faith,  not  one  of  them  would  have  been  condemned 
to  the  stake  as  impenitent." 

1  Of  course  we  do  not  here  refer  to  honest  historians  Uke  Langlois  who 
estimates  that  one  heretic  out  of  every  ten  was  abandoned  to  the  secular 
arm  {op.  cit.,  p.  106).  Dom  Brial  erroneously  states  in  his  preface  to  vol.  xix 
of  the  Reciieil  des  Historiens  des  Gaules  (p.  xxiii)  that  Bernard  Gui  burned 
637  heretics.  This  figure  represented  the  number  of  heretics  then  known  to 
be  condemned,  but  only  40  of  these  were  abandoned  to  the  secular  arm.  Cf. 
Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  55°-  The  exact  number  is  42  out  of  930.  Cf.  Douais. 
Documents,  vol.  i,  p.  ccv,  and  Appendix  B. 

2  Langlois,  L' Inquisition  d'apres  des  tableaux  recents,  igo2,  ^p.  105,106. 
This  number,  without  being  certain,  is  asserted  by  contemporaries,  Pulgar 
and  Marineo  Siculo.  Cf.  Hefele,  Le  Cardinal  Ximenes,  Pans,  1856,  pp^ 
290    291.      Another  contemporary,  Bernaldes,  speaks  of  over  700  burned 


198  THE   INQUISITION 

"During  this  same  period,"  says  a  contemporary  his- 
torian, "fifteen  thousand  heretics  did  penance,  and  were 
reconciled  to  the  Church."  ^  That  makes  a  total  of 
seventeen  thousand  trials.  We  can  thus  understand 
how  Torquemada,  although  grossly  calumniated,  came 
to  be  identified  with  this  period,  during  which  so  many 
thousands  of  conversos  appeared  before  the  Spanish 
tribunals.^ 

The  zeal  of  the  Inquisitors  seemed  to  abate  after  a  timc.^ 
Perhaps  they  thought  it  better  to  keep  the  Jews  and 
the  Mussulmans  in  the  church  by  kindness.  But  kind- 
ness failed  just  as  force  had  failed.  After  one  hundred 
years,  the  number  of  obdurate  conversos  was  as  great  as 
ever.  Several  ardent  advocates  of  force  advised  the 
authorities  to  send  them  all  to  the  stake.  But  the  State 
determined  to  drive  the  Moriscos  from  Spain,  as  it  had 
banished  the  Jews  in  1492.  Accordingly  in  September, 
1609,  a  law  was  passed  decreeing  the  banishment,  under 
penalty  of  death,  of  all  Moriscos,  men,  women,  and  chil- 

from.    1481-1488;    cf.    Gams,    Kirchengeschichte   von    Spanicn,   vol.   iii,   2, 
p.  69. 

1  Pulgar,  in  Hefele,  op.  cit.,  p.  291. 

2  Torquemada  established  the  Inquisition  in  the  different  cities  of  Castile, 
Aragon,  Valencia,  and  Catalonia. 

3  "The  Inquisition  of  Valencia  condemned  one  hundred  and  twelve  con- 
versos in  1538  (of  whom  fourteen  were  sent  to  the  stake);  at  the  auto  de  fe 
of  Seville,  September  24,  1559,  three  were  burned,  and  eight  were  reconciled 
and  sentenced  to  life-imprisonment;  on  June  6,  1585,  the  Inquisitors  of  Sara- 
gossa  in  their  account  to  Philip  II  speak  of  having  reconciled  sixty-three,  and 
of  having  sent  five  to  the  stake."  Langlois,  op.  cit.,  p.  106. 


THE    INQUISITION  199 

dren.  Five  hundred  thousand  persons,  about  one  six- 
teenth of  the  population,  were  thus  banished  from  Spain, 
and  forced  to  seek  refuge  on  the  coasts  of  Barbary.^ 
"Behold,"  writes  Brother  Bleda,  "the  most  glorious  event 
in  Spain  since  the  times  of  the  apostles;  religious  unity  is 
now  secured;  an  era  of  prosperity  is  certainly  about  to 
dawn."  ^  This  era  of  prosperity  so  proudly  announced 
by  the  Dominican  zealot  never  came.  This  extreme 
measure  which  pleased  him  so  greatly  in  reality  weakened 
Spain,  by  depriving  her  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  her 
subjects. 

The  witchcraft  fever  which  spread  over  Europe  in 
the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  stimulated  to  an 
extraordinary  degree  the  zeal  of  the  Inquisitors.  The 
bull  of  Innocent  VIII,  Siimmis  desider antes,  December  5, 
1484,  made  matters  worse.  The  Pope  admitted  that  men 
and  women  could  have  immoral  relations  with  demons, 
and  that  sorcerers  by  their  magical  incantations  could 
injure  the  harvests,  the  vineyards,  the  orchards  and  the 
fields.^ 

1  Langlois,  op.  cit.,  p.  no. 

2  Cf.  Bleda,  Defensio  fidei  in  causa  neophytorum  sive  Moriscorum  regni 
Valentini  totiusque  Hispanic,  Valencia,  1610;  Tractatus  de  jusia  Moriscorum 
ab  Hispania  expulsione,  Valencia,  1610;  cf.  Llorente,  Histoire  de  Plnquisition 
d'Espagne,  Paris,  18 17,  vol.  iii,  p.  430. 

i"Sane  nuper  ad  nostrum  non  sine  ingenti  molestia  pervenit  auditum, 
quod  in  nonnuUis  partibus  Allemaniae  superioris  .  .  .  complures  utriusque 
sexus  personae  ...  a  fide  catholica  deviantes,  cum  daemonibus  incubis  et 
succubis  abuti  ac  suis  incantationibus  et  conjurationibus  aliisque  nefandis 
superstitionibus  et  sortilegiis,   excessibus,   criminibus  et  delictis,   mulierum 


200  THE    INQUISITION 

He  also  complained  of  the  folly  of  those  ecclesiastics 
and  laymen  who  opposed  the  Inquisition  in  its  prosecu- 
tion of  heretical  sorcerers,  and  concluded  by  conferring 
additional  powers  upon  the  Dominican  Inquisitors,  In- 
stitoris  and  Sprenger,  the  author  of  the  famous  Malleus 
Maleficarum. 

Innocent  VIII  assuredly  had  no  intention  of  committing 
the  Church  to  a  belief  in  the  phenomena  he  mentioned 
in  his  bull,  but  his  personal  opinion  ^  did  have  an  influ- 

partus,  animalium  foetus,  terras  fruges,  vinearum  uvas  et  arborum  fructus, 
necnon  homines,  mulieres,  pecora,  pecudcs,  et  alia  diversorum  generum 
animalia,  vineas  quoque,  pomeria,  prata,  pascua,  blada,  frumenta  et  alia 
terras  legumina,  perire,  suffocari  et  extinguere."  Bullarium,  vol.  v,  p.  296 
and  seq.,  and  Pegna's  Bullarium  in  Eymeric,  Directorium  Inquisit.,  p.  83. 
The  notion  of  dcemones  succubi  et  incubi  comes  from  St.  Augustine:  "Et 
quoniam  creberrima  fania  est,  multique  se  expertos  vel  ab  eis  qui  expert! 
essent,  de  quorum  fide  dubitandum  non  est,  audisse  confirmant,  Sylvanos  et 
Faunos,  quos  vulgo  incubos  vocant,  improbos  saipe  extitisse  mulieribus  et 
earum  appetisse  ac  peregisse  concubitum,  et  quosdam  dcemones,  quos  Dusios 
Galli  nuncupant,  hanc  assidue  immunditiam  et  tentare  et  efficcre  plures 
talesque  asseverant,  ut  hoc  negare  impudentiaj  videatur,"  etc.  De  Civitate 
Dei,  lib.  xv,  cap.  xxiii,  no.  i.  Cf.  Summa,  pars  i^,  cjuxst.  li,  art.  3,  ad  6um. 
On  witches,  cf.  the  bulls  Honest  is  of  Leo  X  (February  15,  152 1),  Dudum  of 
Adrian  VI  (July  20,  1522),  Cceli  et  terrm  of  Sixtus  V  (January  5,  1586),  in 
Eymeric,  loc.  cit.,  pp.  99,  105,  142. 

1  Pastor  writes  (History  of  the  Popes,  vol.  v,  p.  349)  concerning  the  reality 
of  these  facts:  "The  question  whether  the  Pope  believed  in  them  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  subject.  His  judgment  on  this  point  has  no  greater  importance 
than  attaches  to  a  papal  decree  in  any  other  undogmatic  question,  e.g.  in 
a  dispute  about  a  benefice."  The  learned  historian  is  wrong,  for  the  Pope's 
views  made  a  great  difference  in  this  particular  case.  Many  canonists  cited 
it  as  proof,  and  the  Inquisitors  acted  on  it  in  their  tribunals.  "Prasterea  qui 
hoc  asserunt  somnia  esse  et  ludibria,  certe  peccant  contra  reverentiam  matri 
debitam,"  says  the  Jesuit  Delrio,  Disquisitio  magna,  ed.  1603,  lib.  II,  quasst. 
xvi,  p.  149;  cf.  p.  159;  cf.  Malleus  maleficarum  of  Sprenger,  and  the  Novus 
malleus  maleficarum  of  Spina,  Cologne,  1581,  p.  146  and  seq.,  etc. 


THE   INQUISITION  201 

ence  upon  the  canonists  and  Inquisitors  of  his  day;  this 
is  clear  from  the  trials  for  witchcraft  held  during  this 
period.^  It  is  impossible  to  estimate  the  number  of  sor- 
cerers condemned.  Louis  of  Paramo  triumphantly  de- 
clared that  in  a  century  and  a  half  the  Holy  Office  sent  to 
the  stake  over  thirty  thousand.-  Of  course  we  must  take 
such  round  numbers  with  a  grain  of  salt,  as  they  always 
are  greatly  exaggerated.  But  the  fact  remains  that  the 
condemnations  for  sorcery  were  so  numerous  as  to  stagger 
belief.  The  Papacy  itself  recognized  the  injustice  of  its 
agents.  For  in  1637  instructions  were  issued  stigmatiz- 
ing the  conduct  of  the  Inquisitors  on  account  of  their 
arbitrary  and  unjust  prosecution  of  sorcerers;  they  were 
accused  of  extorting  from  them  by  cruel  tortures  con- 
fessions that  were  valueless,  and  of  abandoning  them  to 
the  secular  arm  without  suificient  cause.^ 


1  On  this  question,  cf.  Janssen-Pastor,  Geschichte  dcs  deutschen  Volkcs, 
vol.  viii,  Fribourg,  1894,  p.  507  and  seq.;  Finke,  Historisches  Jahrbuch, 
vol.  xiv,  p.  341  and  seq.;  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  iii,  pp.  492-549- 

2  r>e  Origine  Ofticii  sanct(B  Inquisitionis,  p.  206.  Lea  says  that  "Protes- 
tants and  Catholics  rivaled  each  other  in  the  madness  of  the  hour."      Op.  cit., 

vol.  iii,  p.  549- 

3  "Experientia  rerum  magistra  aperte  docet  gravissimos  quotidie  committi 
errores  a  diversis  Ordinariis,  Vicariis  et  Inquisitoribus,  sed  pra^cipue  a  secu- 
laribus  judicibus  in  formandis  processibus  contra  striges  sive  lamias  et 
maleficas  in  grave  praejudicium  tam  justitiae  quam  hujusmodi  mulierum 
inquisitarum:  cum  longo  tempore  observatum  fuerit,  plures  hujusmodi 
processus  non  rite  ac  juridice  formatos,  imo  plerumque  necesse  fuisse  quam- 
plures  judices  reprehendere  et  multos  et  impertinentes  modos  habitos  in 
formandis  processibus,  reis  interrogandis,  excessivis  torturis  inferendis  ita, 
ut  quandoque  contigerit  injustas  et  iniquas  proferri  sententias,  etiam  ultimi 


202  THE   INQUISITION 

Confiscation,  though  not  so  severe  a  penalty  as  the 
stake,  bore  very  heavily  upon  the  victims  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion. The  Roman  laws  classed  the  crime  of  heresy  with 
treason,  and  visited  it  with  a  principal  penalty,  death, 
and  a  secondary  penalty,  confiscation.  They  decreed 
that  all  heretics,  without  exception,  forfeited  their  prop- 
erty the  very  day  they  wavered  in  the  faith.  Actual 
confiscation  of  goods  did  not  take  place  in  the  case  of 
those  penitents  who  had  deserved  no  severer  punishment 
than  temporary  imprisonment.  Bernard  Gui  answered 
those  who  objected  to  this  ruling,  by  showing  that,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  there  was  no  real  pecuniary  loss  in- 
volved. For,  he  argued:  "Secondary  penances  are  in- 
flicted only  upon  those  heretics  who  denounce  their 
accomplices.  But,  by  this  denunciation,  they  ensure 
the  discovery  and  arrest  of  the  guilty  ones,  who,  without 
their  aid,  would  have  escaped  punishment;  the  goods  of 
these  heretics  are  at  once  confiscated,  which  is  certainly 
a  positive  gain."  ^     Actual  confiscation  took  place  in  the 

supplicii,  sive  traditionis  brachio  saeculari,  et  reipsa  compertum  est,  multos 
judices  ita  faciles  proclivesque  fuisse  ob  leve  aut  minimum  indicium  credere 
aliquam  talem  esse  strigem,  et  nihil  omnino  praetermisisse  ab  hujusmodi 
muliere,  etiam  modis  illicitis,  talem  confessionem  extorquere,  cum  tot  tamen 
tantisque  inverisimilitudinibus,  varietatibus  et  contrarietatibus,  ut  super  tali 
confessione  nulla  aut  modica  vis  fieri  posset."  Pignatelli,  Consultationes 
novissimce  canoniccs,  Venetiis,  2  in  fol.,  vol.  i,  p.  505,  Consultatio  123. 

^  "Si  autem  aliquibus  videatur  absurdum,  gratiam  prcecipue  de  confisca- 
tione  bonorum  in  prejudicium  fisci  aut  domini  temporalis  per  Inquisitores 
fieri  non  debere,  attendant  quod  ex  predicta  gratia  promissa  et  facta  ex 
causa  rationabili,  ut  prasmittitur,  revelantur  personae  ali^e  quae  latebant,  et 


THE    INQUISITION  203 

case  of  all  obdurate  and  relapsed  heretics  abandoned  to 
the  secular  arm,  with  all  penitents  condemned  to  per- 
petual imprisonment,  and  with  all  suspects  who  had 
managed  to  escape  the  Inquisition,  either  by  flight  or  by 
death.  The  heretic  who  died  peacefully  in  bed  before 
the  Inquisition  could  lay  hands  upon  him  was  consid- 
ered contumacious,  and  treated  as  such;  his  remains 
were  exhumed,^  and  his  property  confiscated.  This  last 
fact  accounts  for  the  incredible  frequency  of  prosecutions 
against  the  dead.  Of  the  six  hundred  and  thirty-six  cases 
tried  by  Bernard  Gui,  eighty-eight  were  posthumous.^  As 
a  general  rule,  the  confiscation  of  the  heretic's  property, 
which  so  frequently  resulted  from  the  trials  of  the  In- 
quisition, had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  the  interest  they 
aroused.  We  do  not  say  that  the  Holy  Office  system- 
atically increased  the  number  of  its  condemnations 
merely  to  increase  its  pecuniary  profits.  But  abuses  of 
this  kind  were  inevitable.    We  know  they  existed,  because 

quod  in  uno  videtur  amitti  recuperatur  in  pluribus  cum  augmento."  Prac- 
tica,  3  pars,  p.  185. 

1  This  was  done  with  great  solemnity.  The  bones  and  even  the  decom- 
posed body  of  the  heretic  were  carried  through  the  city  streets  at  the  souna 
of  a  trumpet,  and  then  burned.  The  names  of  the  dead  were  read  out,  and 
the  Hving  were  threatened  with  a  like  fate  if  they  followed  their  example, 
"De  cimeteriis  .  .  .  extumulati  .  .  .  et  ossa  eorum  et  corpora  fastentia  per 
villam  tracta  et  voce  tibicinatoris  per  vicos  proclamata  et  nominata  dicentis: 
Qui  aytal  fara,  aytal  perira."  Chronique  of  Guillem  Pelhisse,  published  by 
Douais,  p.  no.  Guillem  Pelhisse  was  one  of  the  first  Inquisitors  of 
Albi. 

2  Eighty-nine  out  of  nine  hundred  and  thirty.  Cf.  Douais,  Documents, 
vol.  i,  p.  ccv,  and  Appendix  B. 


204  THE    INQUISITION 

the  Popes  denounced  them  strongly,  although  they  were 
too  rare  to  deserve  more  than  a  passing  mention.  But 
would  the  ecclesiastical  and  lay  princes  who,  in  varying 
proportions,  shared  with  the  Holy  Office  in  these  confis- 
cations, and  who  in  some  countries  appropriated  them 
all,  have  accorded  to  the  Inquisition  that  continual  good- 
will and  help  which  was  the  condition  of  its  prosperity, 
without  what  Lea  calls  "the  stimulant  of  pillage"?  We 
may  very  well  doubt  it.  .  .  .  That  is  why  in  point  of 
fact  their  zeal  for  the  faith  languished  whenever 
pecuniary  gain  was  not  forthcoming.  "In  our  days," 
writes  the  Inquisitor  Eymeric  rather  gloomily,  "  there 
are  no  more  rich  heretics,  so  that  princes,  not  seeing 
much  money  in  prospect,  will  not  put  themselves  to  any 
expense;  it  is  a  pity  that  so  salutary  an  institution  as 
ours  should  be  so  uncertain  of  its  future,"  ^ 

Most  historians  have  said  little  or  nothing  about  the 
money  side  of  the  Inqusition.  Lea  was  the  first  to  give  it 
the  attention  it  deserved.  He  writes:  "  In  addition  to  the 
misery  inflicted  by  these  wholesale  confiscations  on  the 
thousands  of  innocent  and  helpless  women  and  children 
thus  stripped  of  everything,  it  would  be  almost  impossible 
to  exaggerate  the  evil  which  they  entailed  upon  all  classes 
in  the  business  of  daily  life."  ^    There  was  indeed  very 


1  Langlois,  op.  cit.,  pp.  75-78.     Cf.  Lea,  op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  pp.  501-524,  cf. 
Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  523-538. 

2  Lea,  op.  cit.,  p.  522. 


THE   INQUISITION  205 

little  security  in  business,  for  the  contracts  of  a  hidden 
heretic  were  essentially  null  and  void,  and  could  be 
rescinded  as  soon  as  his  guilt  was  discovered,  either  during 
his  lifetime  or  after  his  death.  In  view  of  such  a  penal 
code,  we  can  understand  why  Lea  should  write:  "While 
the  horrors  of  the  crowded  dungeon  can  scarce  be  ex- 
aggerated, yet  more  effective  for  evil  and  more  widely 
exasperating  was  the  sleepless  watchfulness  which  was 
ever  on  the  alert  to  plunder  the  rich  and  to  wrench  from 
the  poor  the  hard-earned  gains  on  which  a  family  de- 
pended for  support/'^ 

•  ••••••, 

This  summary  of  the  acts  of  the  Inquisition  is  at  best 
but  a  brief  and  very  imperfect  outline.  But  a  more  com- 
plete study  would  not  afford  us  any  deeper  insight  into 
its  operation. 

Human  passions  are  responsible  for  the  many  abuses 
of  the  Inquisition.  The  civil  power  in  heresy  trials  was 
far  from  being  partial  to  the  accused.  On  the  contrary, 
it  would  seem  that  the  more  pressure  the  State  brought 
to  bear  upon  the  ecclesiastical  tribunals,  the  more  arbi- 
trary their  procedure  became. 

We  do  not  deny  that  the  zeal  of  the  Inquisitors  was  at 
times  excessive,  especially  in  the  use  of  torture.  But 
some  of  their  cruelty  may  be  explained  by  their  sincere 
desire  for  the  salvation  of  the  heretic.    They  regarded 

1  I.ea,  op.  cit.,  p.  4S0 


2o6  THE   INQUISITION 

the  confession  of  suspects  as  the  beginning  of  their  con- 
version. They  therefore  believed  any  means  used  for 
that  purpose  justified.  They  thought  that  an  In- 
quisitor had  done  something  praiseworthy,  when,  even  at 
the  cost  of  cruel  torments,  he  freed  a  heretic  from  his 
heresy.  He  was  sorry  indeed  to  be  obliged  to  use  force; 
but  that  was  not  altogether  his  fault,  but  the  fault  of 
the  laws  which  he  had  to  enforce. 

Most  men  regard  the  auto  de  fe  as  the  worst  horror  of 
the  Inquisition.  It  is  hardly  ever  pictured  without  burn- 
ing flames  and  ferocious  looking  executioners.  But  an 
auto  de  fe  did  not  necessarily  call  for  either  stake  or 
executioner.  It  was  simply  a  solemn  "Sermon,"  which 
the  heretics  about  to  be  condemned  had  to  attend.^  The 
death  penalty  was  not  always  inflicted  at  these  solemnities, 
which  were  intended  to  impress  the  imagination  of  the 
people.  Seven  out  of  eighteen  autos  de  je  presided  over 
by  the  famous  Inquisitor,  Bernard  Gui,  decreed  no  severer 
penalty  than  imprisonment. 

1  On  these  "Sermons,"  cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  425-431.  In  France  the 
heretics  were  not  dressed  in  any  particular  costume  or  mitred  as  in  Spain 
during  the  sixteenth  century.  There  is  but  one  mention  of  mitred  heretics, 
viz.  at  the  auto  de  fe  against  sorcerers  at  Arras  in  1459.  "Et  illec  furent 
mitres  d'une  mitre  oil  estait  peinct  la  figure  du  diable  en  telle  maniere  qu'ils 
avaient  confesse  lui  avoir  fait  hommage,  et  eulx  k  genoux  peincts  devant 
le  diable;  et  illecq,  par  M.  P.  Le  Broussart,  Inquisiteur  de  la  foy  chretienne, 
preschiez  publiquement,  present  tout  le  peuple;  et  y  avoit  tant  de  gens  que 
ce  estoit  merveille,  car  de  tous  les  villages  d'entour  Arras  et  de  dix  ou 
douze  lieues  allenviron  et  plus  y  avait  de  gens."  Fredericq,  Corpus  docu- 
mentorum  inquisitionis  Neerlandica,  vol.  i,  p.  353. 


THE   INQUISITION  207 

We  have  seen,  moreover,  that  in  many  places,  even  in 
Spain  at  a  certain  period,  the  number  of  heretics  con- 
demned to  death  was  rather  small.  Even  Lea,  whom  no 
one  can  accuse  of  any  great  partiality  for  the  Church,  is 
forced  to  state:  ''The  stake  consumed  comparatively 
few  victims."  ^ 

In  fact,  imprisonment  and  confiscation  were  as  a  rule 
the  severest  penalties  inflicted. 

1  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  480.  In  making  this  statement,  Lea  of  course  means 
to  exclude  the  witchcraft  trials,  which  he  treats  in  another  part  of  his  work. 
Cf.  vol.  iii,  ch.  vii,  pp.  492-549. 


CHAPTER    X 

A  Criticism  of  the  Theory  and   Practice  of  the 

Inquisition 

Such  was  the  development  for  over  one  thousand  years 
(200-1300)  of  the  theory  of  CathoHc  writers  on  the 
coercive  power  of  the  Church  in  the  treatment  of  heresy. 
It  began  with  the  principle  of  absolute  toleration;  it 
ended  with  the  stake. 

During  the  era  of  the  persecutions,  the  Church,  who 
was  suffering  herself  from  pagan  intolerance,  merely  ex- 
communicated heretics,  and  tried  to  win  them  back 
to  the  orthodox  faith  by  kindness  and  the  force  of 
argument.  But  when  the  emperors  became  Christians, 
they,  in  memory  of  the  days  when  they  were  "  Pontifices 
maximi,"  at  once  endeavored  to  regulate  worship  and 
doctrine,  at  least  externally.  Unfortunately,  certain  sects, 
hated  like  the  Manicheans,  or  revolutionary  in  character 
like  the  Donatists,  prompted  the  enactment  of  cruel 
laws  for  their  suppression.  St.  Optatus  approved  these 
measures,  and  Pope  St.  Leo  had  not  the  courage  to 
disavow  them.    Still,    most    of    the    early    Fathers,    St. 

John  Chrysostom,  St.   Martin,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Augus- 

208 


THE   INQUISITION  209 

tine,  and  many  others,^  protested  strongly  in  the  name 
of  Christian  charity  against  the  infliction  of  the  death  pen- 
alty upon  heretics.  St.  Augustine,  who  formed  the  mind 
of  his  age,  at  first  favored  the  theory  of  absolute  tolera- 
tion. But  afterwards,  perceiving  that  certain  good  re- 
sults followed  from  what  he  called  "a  salutary  fear,"  he 
modified  his  views.  He  then  maintained  that  the  State 
could  and  ought  to  punish  by  fine,  confiscation,  or  even 
exile,  her  rebellious  children,  in  order  to  make  them  repent. 
This  may  be  called  his  theory  of  moderate  persecution. 

The  revival  of  the  Manichean  heresy  in  the  eleventh 
century  took  the  Christian  princes  and  people  by  sur- 
prise, unaccustomed  as  they  were  to  the  legislation  of  the 
first  Christian  emperors.  Still  the  heretics  did  not  fare 
any  better  on  that  account.  For  the  people  rose  up  against 
them,  and  burned  them  at  the  stake.  The  Bishops  and 
the  Fathers  of  the  Church  at  once  protested  against  this 
lynching  of  heretics.  Some,  like  Wazo  of  Liege,  repre- 
sented the  party  of  absolute  toleration,  while  others,  under 
the  leadership  of  St.  Bernard,  advocated  the  theory  of 

1  Lea  (op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  214,  215)  says  that  St.  Jerome  was  an  advocate 
of  force.  "Rigor  in  fact,"  argues  St.  Jerome,  "is  the  most  genuine  mercy, 
since  temporal  punishment  may  avert  eternal  perdition."  Here  St.  Jerome 
merely  says  that  God  punishes  in  time  that  He  may  not  punish  in  eternity. 
But  he  by  no  means  "argues"  that  this  punishment  should  be  in  the  hands 
of  either  Church  or  State.  "Scitote  eum  (Deum)  ideo  ad  praesens  reddidisse 
supplicia,  ne  in  sternum  puniret  .  .  .  Optandum  est  adulteris  ut  in  prassen- 
tiarum  brevi  et  cita  paena  cruciatus  frustrentur  ceternos."  Commentar.,  m- 
Naum,  i,  9,  P.  L.,  vol.  xxv,  col.  1238.  This  is  the  chief  text  quoted  by 
Lea. 

15 


2IO  THE   INQUISITION 

St.  Augustine.  Soon  after  churchmen  began  to  decree 
the  penalty  of  imprisonment  for  heresy  —  a  penalty  un- 
known to  the  Roman  law,  and  regarded  in  the  beginning 
more  as  a  penance  than  a  legal  punishment.  It  origi- 
nated in  the  cloister,  gradually  made  its  way  into  the  tri- 
bunals of  the  Bishop,  and  finally  into  the  tribunals  of  the 
State. 

Canon  law,  helped  greatly  by  the  revival  of  the  imperial 
code,  introduced  in  the  twelfth  century  definite  laws  for 
the  suppression  of  heresy.  This  regime  lasted  from  1 1 50 
till  121 5,  from  Gratian  to  Innocent  III.  Heresy,  the 
greatest  sin  against  God,  was  classed  with  treason,  and 
visited  with  the  same  penalty.  The  penalty  was  banish- 
ment with  all  its  consequences;  i.e.  the  destruction  of  the 
houses  of  heretics,  and  the  confiscation  of  their  prop- 
erty. Still,  because  of  the  horror  which  the  Church  had 
always  professed  for  the  efi"usion  of  blood,  she  did  not 
as  yet  inflict  the  death  penalty  which  the  State  decreed 
for  treason.  Innocent  III  did  not  wish  to  go  beyond  the 
limits  ^  set  by  St.  Augustine,  St.  John  Chrysostom,  and 
St.  Bernard. 

But  later  Popes  and  princes  went  further.  They  be- 
gan by  decreeing  death  as  a  secondary  penalty,^  in  case 

1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  62,  63. 

2  "  Et  si  post  tempus  prasfixum,"  says  Pedro  of  Aragon,  "aliqui  in  tota  terra 
nostra  eos  invenerint  .  .  .  ,  corpora  eorum  ignibus  crementur."  De  Marca, 
Marca  Hispanica,  col.  1484.  In  the  statutes  of  Bologna  of  1245,  the  podest^ 
swore  to  banish  heretics;  if  they  refused  to  leave  the  city  and  were   not  con- 


THE    INQUISITION  211 

heretics  rebelled  against  the  law  of  banishment.  But 
when  the  emperor  Frederic  had  revived  the  legislation 
of  his  Christian  predecessors  of  the  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth 
centuries,^  and  had  made  the  popular  custom  of  burning 
heretics  a  law  of  the  empire,  the  Papacy  could  not  resist 
the  current  of  his  example.  The  Popes  at  once  ordered 
the  new  legislation  vigorously  enforced  everywhere,  es- 
pecially in  Lombardy.  This  was  simply  the  logical 
carrying  out  of  the  comparison  made  by  Innocent  III 
between  heresy  and  treason,  and  was  due  chiefly  to  two 
Popes:  Gregory  IX  who  established  the  Inquisition  under 
the  Dominicans  and  the  Franciscans,  and  Innocent  IV 
who  authorized  the  Inquisitors  to  use  torture. 

The  theologians  and  casuists  soon  began  to  defend  the 
procedure  of  the  Inquisition.  They  seemed  absolutely 
unaffected,  in  theory  at  least,^  by  the  most  cruel  tor- 

verted,  they  were  to  be  arrested  and  sent  to  the  stake.  Ficker,  op.  cit.,  pp. 
205,  206. 

1  Cf.  the  law  of  Arcadius  of  395  {Cod.  Theodos.,  xvi,  v.  28),  which  says: 
"Qui  vel  levi  argumento  a  judicio  catholicae  reUgionis  et  tramite  detecti 
fuerint  de\aare,"  and  the  SiciUan  constitution  Inconsutilem  tunicam  (in 
Eymeric,  Directorium  inquisitorum.  Appendix,  p.  14),  where  we  read:  "Si 
inventi  fuerint  a  fide  cathohca  saltern  in  articulo  deviare,"  and  again:  "Prout 
veteribus  legibus  est  indictum." 

2  Practically  speaking,  the  Inquisitors  often  remained  unmoved  at  the  lot 
of  heretics.  The  following  fact  is  a  proof.  "It  was  in  the  year  1234,  the 
day  on  which  the  news  of  St.  Dominic's  canonization  reached  Toulouse. 
The  Bishop,  Raymond  du  Felgar,  had  just  said  solemn  mass  in  the  Dominican 
convent,  in  honor  of  this  canonization,  and  was  on  his  way  to  the  refectory 
with  the  brethren,  when  some  one  came  from  the  city  saying  that  they  were 
about  to  'hereticate'  an  old  woman,  sick  with  the  fever.  The  Bishop  at 
once  went  with  the  prior  to  this  house,  approached  the  sick  woman,  who, 


212  THE   INQUISITION 

ments.  With  them  the  preservation  of  the  orthodox  faith 
was  paramount,  and  superior  to  all  sentiment.  In  the 
name  of  Christian  charity,  St.  Thomas,  the  great  light  of 
the  thirteenth  century,  taught  that  relapsed  heretics,  even 
when  repentant,  ought  to  be  put  to  death  without 
mercy. 

How  are  we  to  explain  this  development  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  on  the  suppression  of  heresy,  and 
granting  that  a  plausible  explanation  may  be  given,  how 
are  we  to  justify  it? 

•  ••••••• 

Intolerance  is  natural  to  man.  If,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
men  are  not  always  intolerant  in  practice,  it  is  only  because 
they  are  prevented  by  conditions  born  of  reason  and  wis- 
dom. Respect  for  the  opinion  of  others  supposes  a  temper 
of  mind  which  takes  years  to  acquire.  It  is  a  question 
whether  the  average  man  is  capable  of  it.  Intolerance 
regarding  religious  doctrines  especially,  with  the  cruelty 

regarding  him  at  first  as  a  Catharan  bishop,  confessed  her  faith  openly  to 
him,  and  then  persisted  in  her  heresy  when  she  learned  who  he  was.  There- 
upon, he  condemned  her  as  a  heretic,  and  handed  her  over  to  the  Count's 
vicar,  who  had  her  transferred  to  Pre-le-Compte,  where  she  was  burned  in 
her  bed."  After  this,  the  Bishop  and  the  Dominicans  went  to  the  refectory, 
where  they  joyfully  ate  their  dinner,  giving  thanks  to  God  and  to  St.  Dominic: 
Episcopus  vero  et  fratres  et  socii  hoc  completo  venerunt  ad  refectorium  et 
quag  parata  erant  cum  laetitia  comederunt,  gratias  agentes  Deo  et  beato 
Dominico.  G.  Pelhisse,  Chronigue,  ed.  Douais,  pp.  97,  98;  Tanon,  op.  cit., 
PP-  54.  55-  The  condemnation  and  execution  of  this  sick  woman  did  not 
interfere  with  their  festivities  in  honor  of  St.  Dominic,  because  they  all  thought 
that  they  had  performed  a  pious  duty.  Such  light-heartedness  is  very 
hard  for  us  to  understand  to-day. 


THE    INQUISITION  213 

that  usually  accompanies  it,  has  practicaly  been  the  law 
of  history.    From  this  view-point,  the  temper  of  mind  of 
the  mediaeval  Christians  differed  little  from  that  of  the 
pagans  of  the  empire.     A  Roman  of  the  second  or  third 
century  considered  blasphemy  against  the  gods  a  crime 
that  deserved  the  greatest  torments;  a  Christian  of  the 
eleventh  century  felt  the  same  toward  the  apostates  and 
enemies  of  the  Catholic  faith.   This  is  clearly  seen  from  the 
treatment  accorded  the  first  Manicheans  who  came  from 
Bulgaria,  and  gained  some  adherents  at  Orleans,  Mont- 
Wimer,  Soissons,  Liege,  and  Goslar.     At  once  there  was 
a  popular  uprising  against  them,  which  evidenced  what 
may  be  called  the  instinctive  intolerance  of  the  people. 
The  civil  authorities  of  the  day  shared  this  hatred,  and 
proved  it  either  by  sending  heretics  to  the  stake  them- 
selves, or  allowing  the  people  to  do  so.     As  Lea  has  said: 
"The  practice  of  burning  the  heretic  alive  was  thus  not 
the    creation   of   positive    law,  but  arose  generally  and 
spontaneously,  and  its  adoption  by  the  legislator  was  only 
the  recognition  of  a   popular   custom."  ^      Besides,   the 
sovereign  could   not   brook   riotous  men  who  disturbed 
the  established    order    of  his  dominions.     He  was  well 
aware  that  public  tranquillity  depended  chiefly  upon  re- 
ligious principles,  which  ensured    that  moral   unity  de- 
sired by  every  ruler.      Pagan  antiquity  had  dreamed  of 
this  unity,  and  its  philosophers,  interpreting  its  mind, 

*  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  222. 


214  THE   INQUISITION 

showed  themselves  just  as  intolerant  as  the  theologians 
of  the  Middle  Ages. 

"Plato,"  writes  Gaston  Boissier,  "in  his  ideal  Republic, 
denies  toleration  to  the  impious,  i.e.  to  those  who  did 
not  accept  the  State  religion.  Even  if  they  remained 
quiet  and  peaceful,  and  carried  on  no  propaganda,  they 
seemed  to  him  dangerous  by  the  bad  example  they  gave. 
He  condemned  them  to  be  shut  up  in  a  house  where  they 
might  learn  wisdom  (sophronisteria)  —  by  this  pleasant 
euphemism  he  meant  a  prison  —  and  for  five  years  they 
were  to  listen  to  a  discourse  every  day.  The  impious  who 
caused  disturbance  and  tried  to  corrupt  others  were  to 
be  imprisoned  for  life  in  a  terrible  dungeon,  and  after 
death  were  to  be  denied  burial."  ^  Apart  from  the 
stake,  was  not  this  the  Inquisition  to  the  life?  In  coun- 
tries where  religion  and  patriotism  went  hand  in  hand, 
we  can  readily  conceive  this  intolerance.  Sovereigns  were 
naturally  inclined  to  believe  that  those  who  interfered 
with  the  public  worship  unsettled  the  State,  and  their 
conviction  became  all  the  stronger  when  the  State  re- 
ceived from  heaven  a  sort  of  special  investiture.  This 
was  the  case  with  the  Christian  empire.  Constantine,  to- 
wards the  end  of  his  career,  thought  himself  ordained  by 
God,  "a  bishop  in  externals,"  ^  and  his  successors  strove 

1  La    fin   du    paganism,    vol.    i,    pp.    47,    48-       Cf.    Plato's    Republic, 
Book  II;   Laws,  Book  X. 

2  "Ego  vero  in  eis  quae  extra  (Ecclesiam)  geruntur  episcopus  a  Deo  sum 
consiitutus."     Eusebius,  VUa  Consiantini,  lib  iv,  cap.  xxiv. 


THE    INQUISITION  215 

to  keep  intact  the  deposit  of  faith.  "The  first  care  of  the 
imperial  majesty,"  said  one  of  them,  "is  to  protect  the 
true  religion,  for  with  its  worship  is  connected  the  pros- 
perity of  human  undertakings."  ^  Thus  some  of  their 
laws  were  passed  in  view  of  strengthening  the  canon  law. 
They  mounted  guard  about  the  Church,  with  sword 
in  hand,  ready  to  use  it  in  her  defence.^ 

The  Middle  Ages  inherited  these  views.  Religious 
unity  was  then  attained  throughout  Europe.  Any 
attempt  to  break  it  was  an  attack  at  once  upon  the 
Church  and  the  Empire.  "The  enemies  of  the  Cross  of 
Christ  and  those  who  deny  the  Christian  faith,"  says  Pedro 
II,  of  Aragon,  "are  also  our  enemies,  and  the  public 
enemies  of  our  kingdom;  they  must  be  treated  as  such."  ^ 
It  was  in  virtue  of  the  same  principle  that  Frederic  II 
punished  heretics  as  criminals  according  to  the  common 
law;  ut  crimina  publica.  He  speaks  of  the  "Ecclesiastical 
peace"  as  of  old  the  emperors  spoke  of  the  "Roman 
peace."  As  Emperor,  he  considered  it  his  duty  "to  pre- 
serve and  to  maintain  it,"  and  woe  betide  the  one  who 
dared  disturb   it.     Feeling  himself  invested  with   both 

1  "Praecipuam  imperatoriae  majestatis  curam  esse  perspicimus  veras  reli- 
gionis  indaginem,  cujus  si  cultum  tenere  potuerimus  iter  prosperitatis 
humanis  aperimus  inceptis."  Theodosius  II,  Novellce,  tit.  iii  (438). 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  29,  n.  3. 

3"Et  omnes  alios  hagreticos  .  .  .  tanquam  inimicos  crucis  Christi  chris- 
tianasque  fidei  violatores  et  nostras  etiam  regnique  nostri  publicos  hostes  exire 
ac  fugere  districte  et  irremeabiliter  praecipimus."  Law  of  1197,  in  De  Marca, 
Marca  Hispanica,  col.  1384. 


2i6  THE   INQUISITION 

human  and  divine  authority/  he  enacted  the  severest 
laws  possible  against  heresy.  What  therefore  might  have 
remained  merely  a  threatening  theory  became  a  terrible 
reality.  The  laws  of  1224,  1231,  1238,  and  1239  prove 
that  both  princes  and  people  considered  the  stake  a 
fitting  penalty  for  heresy. 

It  would  have  been  very  surprising  if  the  Church, 
menaced  as  she  was  by  an  ever  increasing  flood  of  heresy, 
had  not  accepted  the  State's  eager  offer  of  protection. 
She  had  always  professed  a  horror  for  bloodshed.  But 
as  long  as  she  was  not  acting  directly,  and  the  State 
undertook  to  shed  in  its  own  name  the  blood  of  wicked 
men,  she  began  to  consider  solely  the  benefits  that  would 
accrue  to  her  from  the  enforcement  of  the  civil  laws. 
Besides,  by  classing  heresy  with  treason,  she  herself  had 
laid  down  the  premisses  of  the  State's  logical  conclusion, 
the  death  penalty.^    The  Church,  therefore,  could  hardly 

i"Cum  ad  conservandum  pariter  et  fovendum  Ecclesiae  tranquillitatis 
statum  ex  commisso  nobis  imperii  rcgimine  defensores  a  Deo  simus  consti- 
tuti  .  .  .,  utriusque  juris  auctoritate  muniti,  duximus  sanciendum,"  etc. 
Constitution  of  1224,  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  126.  Cf.  the 
Constitution  of  March,  1232,  ibid.,  p.  196,  and  the  Sicilian  Constitution 
Inconsutilem  tunicam,  where  we  read:  "Statuimus  in  primis,  ut  crimen 
heereseos  et  damnatae  sect^  cujuslibet,  quoqumque  nomine  censeantur  (prout 
veteribus  legibus  est  indictum)  inter  publica  crimina  numerentur."  In 
Eymeric,  Directorum  Inquisitorum,  Appendix,  p.  14. 

2  "Cum  enim  secundum  legitimas  sanctiones  reis  lasa,  majestatis  punitis 
capite  bona  confiscentur  eorum  .  .  .;  cum  longe  sit  gravius  (Bternam  qtmm 
temporalem  Icedere  majestaiem,"  etc.,  said  Innocent  III  in  a  letter  of 
March  25,  1199,  Ep.  ii,  i.  "Cum  longe  sit  gravius  aeternam  quam  tempo- 
ralem offendere  majestatem,"  said  Frederic  II  in  his  Constitution  of  1220, 


THE   INQUISITION  217 

call  in  question  the  justice  of  the  imperial  laws,  without 
in  a  measure  going  against  the  principles  she  herself  had 
advocated. 

Church  and  State,  therefore,  continually  influenced  one 
the  other.  The  theory  upheld  by  the  Church  reacted  on 
the  State  and  caused  it  to  adopt  violent  measures, 
while  the  State  in  turn  compelled  the  Church  to  ap- 
prove its  use  of  force,  although  such  an  attitude  was 
opposed  to  the  spirit  of  early  Christianity. 

The  theologians  and  the  canonists  put  the  finishing 
touches  to  the  situation.  Influenced  by  what  was  happen- 
ing around  them,  their  one  aim  was  to  defend  the  laws  of 
their  day.  This  is  clearly  seen,  if  we  compare  the  Summa 
of  St.  Raymond  of  Pennafort  with  the  Summa  of  St. 
Thomas  Aquinas.  When  St.  Raymond  wrote  his  work, 
the  Church  still  followed  the  criminal  code  of  Popes  Lucius 
III  and  Innocent  III;  she  had  as  yet  no  notion  of  inflict- 
ing the  death  penalty  for  heresy.  But  in  St.  Thomas's 
time,  the  Inquisition  had  been  enforcing  for  some  years 
the  draconian  laws  of  Frederic  II.  The  Angelic  doctor, 
therefore,  made  no  attempt  to  defend  the  obsolete  code  of 
Innocent  III,  but  endeavored  to  show  that  the  imperial 
laws,  then  authorized  by  the  Church,  were  conformable 
to  the  strictest  justice.     His  one  argument  was  to  make 

Mon  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  io8.  And  he  repeats  this  comparison 
in  his  Constitution  of  1232,  n.  8:  "Si  reos  lesas  majestatis,"  etc.,  ibid.,  p.  197. 
A  law  of  407  {Cod.  Theod.,  xvi,  v.  40)  had  long  before  classed  heresy  with 
treason. 


2i8  THE   INQUISITION 

comparisons,  more  or  less  happy,  between  heresy  and 
crimes  against  the  common  law.^ 

At  a  period  when  no  one  considered  a  doctrine  solidly 
proved  unless  authorities  could  be  quoted  in  its  support, 
these  comparisons  were  not  enough.  So  the  theologians 
taxed  their  ingenuity  to  find  quotations,  not  from  the 
Fathers,  which  would  have  been  difficult,  but  from  the 
Scriptures,  which  seemed  favorable  to  the  ideas  then  in 
vogue.  St.  Optatus  had  tried  to  do  this  as  early  as  the 
fifth  century,^  despite  the  antecedent  protests  of  Origen, 
Cyprian,  Lactantius  and  Hilary.  Following  his  example, 
the  churchmen  of  the  Middle  Ages  reminded  their  hearers 
that  according  to  the  sacred  Scriptures,  "Jehovah  was 
a  God  delighting  in  the  extermination  of  his  enemies. 
They  read  how  Saul,  the  chosen  king  of  Israel,  had  been 
divinely  punished  for  sparing  Agag  of  Amalek;  how  the 
prophet  Samuel  had  hewn  him  to  pieces;  how  the  whole- 
sale slaughter  of  the  unbelieving  Canaanites  had  been 
ruthlessly  commanded  and  enforced;  how  Elijah  had 
been  commended  for  slaying  four  hundred  and  fifty 
priests  of  Baal;  and  they  could  not  conceive  how  mercy 
to  those  who  rejected  the  true  faith  could  be  aught  but 
disobedience    to   God.^      Had   not   Almighty  God  said: 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  171  and  seq. 

2De  Schismate  Donatistarum,    p.  iii,  cap.  vii;  cf.  supra,  pp.  16,  17. 

3  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  238.  St.  Pius  V,  in  a  letter  to  Charles  IX,  March  28, 
1569,  demanded  the  destruction  of  the  Huguenots,  donee  deletis  omnibus,  and 
cited   the   destruction  of  Agag  and   the   Amalekites.     Cf.  Vacandard,   Le$ 


THE    INQUISITION  219 

"  If  thy  brother,  the  son  of  thy  mother,  or  thy  daughter, 
or  thy  wife,  that  is  in  thy  bosom,  or  thy  friend,  whom 
thou  lovest  as  thy  own  soul,  would  persuade  thee  secretly, 
saying:  'Let  us  go  and  serve  strange  gods,'  which  thou 
knowest  not,  nor  thy  fathers  .  .  .  consent  not  to  him, 
hear  him  not,  neither  let  thy  eye  spare  him  to  pity  or 
conceal  him,  but  thou  shalt  presently  put  him  to  death. 
Let  thy  hand  be  first  upon  him,  and  afterwards  the  hands 
of  all  the  people."^ 

Such  a  teaching  might  appear,  at  first  sight,  hard  to 
reconcile  with  the  law  of  gentleness  which  Jesus  preached 
to  the  world.  But  the  theologians  quoted  Christ's  words: 
"Do  not  think  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law;  I  am 
not  come  to  destroy  but  to  fulfill,"  ^  and  other  texts  of 
the  gospels  to  prove  the  perfect  agreement  between  the 
Old  and  the  New  law  in  the  matter  of  penalties.  They 
even  went  so  far  as  to  assert  that  St.  John^  spoke  of 
the  penalty  of  fire  to  be  inflicted  upon  heretics.^ 

This  strange  method  of  exegesis  was  not  peculiar  to 
the  founders  and  the  defenders  of  the  tribunals  of  the  In- 
quisition. England,  which  knew  nothing  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion save  for  the  trial  of  the  Templars,  was  just  as  cruel 
to  heretics  as  Gregory  IX  or  Frederic  11. 

Papes  et  la  Saint-Barthelemy,  in  Etudes  de  critique  et  (Thistoire,  3  ed.,  1906, 
pp.  231-238. 

1  Deut.  xiii.  6-9;  cf.  xvii.  1-6. 

2  Matt.  V.  17. 

3  John  XV.  16. 

*  Cf .  supra,  pp.  176,  177. 


220  THE   INQUISITION 

"The  statute  of  May  25,  1382,  directs  the  King  to  issue 
to  his  sheriffs  commissions  to  arrest  Wyclifs  traveling 
preachers,  and  aiders  and  abettors  of  heresy,  and  hold 
them  till  they  justify  themselves  selon  reson  ei  la  ley  de 
seinte  esglise.  After  the  burning  of  Sawtre  by  a  royal 
warrant  confirmed  by  Parliament  in  1400,  the  statute 
'  de  hcereticis  comburendis'  for  the  first  time  inflicted 
in  England  the  death  penalty  as  a  settled  punishment 
for  heresy.  ...  It  forbade  the  dissemination  of  heretical 
opinions  and  books,  empowered  the  bishops  to  seize  all 
offenders  and  hold  them  in  prison  until  they  should  purge 
themselves  or  abjure,  and  ordered  the  bishops  to  proceed 
against  them  within  three  months  after  arrest.  For 
minor  offences  the  bishops  were  empowered  to  imprison 
during  pleasure  and  fine  at  discretion,  —  the  fine  enuring 
to  the  royal  exchequer.  For  obstinate  heresy  or  relapse, 
involving  under  the  canon  law  abandonment  to  the  secular 
arm,  the  bishops  and  their  commissioners  were  the  sole 
judges,  and  on  their  delivery  of  such  convicts,  the  sheriff 
of  the  county,  or  the  mayor  and  bailiffs  of  the  nearest 
town  were  obliged  to  burn  them  before  the  people  on  an 
eminence.  Henry  V  followed  this  up,  and  the  statute 
of  1 41 4  established  throughout  the  kingdom  a  sort  of 
mixed  secular  and  ecclesiastical  Inquisition  for  which  the 
English  system  of  grand  inquests  gave  special  facilities. 
Under  this  legislation,  burning  for  heresy  became  a  not 
unfamiliar  sight  for  English  eyes,  and  Lollardy  was  readily 


THE   INQUISITION  221 

suppressed.  In  1533,  Henry  VIII  repealed  the  statute  of 
1400,  while  retaining  those  of  1382  and  141 4,  and  also  the 
penalty  of  burning  alive  for  contumacious  heresy  and 
relapse,  and  the  dangerous  admixture  of  politics  and 
religion  rendered  the  stake  a  favorite  instrument  of  state- 
craft. One  of  the  earliest  measures  of  the  reign  of  Ed- 
ward VI  was  the  repeal  of  this  law,  as  well  as  those  of 
1382  and  1 41 4,  together  with  all  the  atrocious  legislation 
of  the  Six  Articles.  With  the  reaction  under  Philip  and 
Mary  came  a  revival  of  the  sharp  laws  against  heresy. 
Scarce  had  the  Spanish  marriage  been  concluded  when 
an  obedient  Parliament  re-enacted  the  legislation  of  1382, 
1400,  and  141 4,  which  afforded  ample  machinery  for  the 
numerous  burnings  which  followed.  The  earliest  act  of 
the  first  Parliament  of  Elizabeth  was  the  repeal  of  the 
legislation  of  Philip  and  Mary,  and  of  the  old  statutes 
which  it  had  revived;  but  the  writ  de  hceretico  comhurendo 
had  become  an  integral  part  of  English  law,  and  survived, 
until  the  desire  of  Charles  II  for  Catholic  toleration  caused 
him,  in  1676,  to  procure  its  abrogation,  and  the  restraint 
of  the  ecclesiastical  courts  in  cases  of  atheism,  blasphemy, 
heresy,  and  schism,  and  other  damnable  doctrines  and 
opinions  '  to  the  ecclesiastical  remedies  of  excommunica- 
tion, deprivation,  degradation,  and  other  ecclesiastical 
censures,  not  extending  to  death.  '  ^ 

These  ideas  of  intolerance  were  so  fixed  in  the  public 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  352-354. 


222  THE   INQUISITION 

mind  at  the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages,  that  even  those  who 
protested  against  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition  thought 
that  in  principle  it  was  just.  Farel  wrote  to  Calvin, 
September  8,  1533:  "Some  people  do  not  wish  us  to 
prosecute  heretics.  But  because  the  Pope  condemns  the 
faithful  {i.e.  the  Huguenots)  for  the  crime  of  heresy,  and 
because  unjust  judges  punish  the  innocent,  it  is  absurd 
to  conclude  that  we  must  not  put  heretics  to  death,  in 
order  to  strengthen  the  faithful.  I  myself  have  often 
said  that  I  was  ready  to  suffer  death,  if  I  ever  taught 
anything  contrary  to  sound  doctrine,  and  that  I  would 
deserve  the  most  frightful  torments,  if  I  tried  to  rob  any 
one  of  the  true  faith  in  Christ.  I  cannot,  therefore,  lay 
down  a  different  law  to  others."  * 

Calvin  held  the  same  views.  His  inquisitorial  spirit 
was  manifest  in  his  bitter  prosecution  and  condemnation 
of  the  Spaniard  Michael  Servetus.^  When  any  one  found 
fault  with  him  he  answered:  "The  executioners  of  the 
Pope  taught  that  their  foolish  inventions  were  doctrines 
of  Christ,  and  were  excessively  cruel,  while  I  have  always 
judged  heretics  in  all  kindness  and  in  the  fear  of  God; 

1  CEuvres  completes  de  Calvin,  Brunswick,  1 863-1900,  vol.  xiv,  p. 
612. 

2  Servetus  was  condemned  October  26,  1533,  to  be  burned  alive,  and  was 
executed  the  next  day.  As  early  as  1545,  Calvin  had  written:  "If  he  (Ser- 
vetus)  comes  to  Geneva,  I  will  never  allow  him  to  depart  alive,  as  long  as  I 
have  authority  in  this  city:  Vivum  exire  numquam  patiar.  CEuvres  completes, 
vol.  xii,  p.  283."  Calvin,  however,  wished  the  death  penalty  of  fire  to  be  com- 
muted into  some  other  kind  of  death. 


THE   INQUISITION  223 

I  merely  put  to  death  a  confessed  heretic."  ^  Michael 
Servetus  assuredly  did  not  gain  much  by  the  substitu- 
tion of  Calvin  for  the  Inquisition.^ 

Bullinger  of  Zurich,  speaking  of  the  death  of  Servetus, 
thus  wrote  Lelius  Socinus:  "If,  Lelius,  you  cannot  now 
admit  the  right  of  a  magistrate  to  punish  heretics,  you 
will  undoubtedly  admit  it  some  day.  St.  Augustine  him- 
self at  first  deemed  it  wicked  to  use  violence  towards 
heretics,  and  tried  to  win  them  back  by  the  mere  word 
of  God.  But  finally,  learning  wisdom  by  experience,  he 
began  to  use  force  with  good  effect.  In  the  beginning 
the  Lutherans  did  not  believe  that  heretics  ought  to  be 
punished;  but  after  the  excesses  of  the  Anabaptists,  they 
declared  that  the  magistrate  ought  not  merely  to  repri- 
mand the  unruly,  but  to  punish  them  severely  as  an 
example  to  thousands."  ^ 

1  Ferdinand  Buisson,  Sehastien  Castellio,  Paris,  189 1,  p.  151.  To  justify 
this  execution,  Calvin  published  his  Defensio  orthodoxcE  fidei  de  sacra  Trinitate, 
contra  prodigiosos  errores  Michalis  Serveti  Hispani,  ubi  ostenditur  hcereiicos 
jure  gladii  ccercendos  esse,  Geneva,  1554. 

2  In  1530,  Michael  Servetus  wrote:  "It  is  very  unjust  to  put  men  to 
death  simply  because  they  err  in  interpreting  certain  texts  of  the  Scriptures." 
Cf.  M.  N.  Weiss,  Bulletin  de  la  societe  du  protestantisme  frangais,  December, 
1903,  p.  562.  The  author  adds:  "The  imperial  laws  under  which  Servetus 
was  tried  were  the  decrees  of  Justinian  and  the  laws  of  Frederic  II.  The 
reformers  who  desired  a  rehgious  Renaissance  through  the  Scriptures  had 
not  revised  the  existing  legislation.  Servetus  well  said  that  'Justinian's 
code  was  not  the  law  of  the  primitive  church,  which  never  prosecuted  for 
scriptural  teachings,  or  questions  relating  thereto.'  This  appeal  to  the 
apostolic  traditions  showed  that  he  was  more  logical  than  the  other  re- 
formers."    Ibid.,  p.  565. 

3  Cf.  Ferdinand  Buisson,  op.  cit.,  ch.  xi. 


224  THE   INQUISITION 

Theodore  of  Beza,  who  had  seen  several  of  his  coreligion- 
ists burned  in  France  for  their  faith,  likewise  wrote  in 
1554,  in  Calvanistic  Geneva:  "What  crime  can  be  greater 
or  more  heinous  than  heresy,  which  sets  at  nought  the 
word  of  God  and  all  ecclesiastical  discipline?  Christian 
magistrates,  do  your  duty  to  God,  who  has  put  the  sword 
into  your  hands  for  the  honor  of  his  majesty;  strike 
valiantly  these  monsters  in  the  guise  of  men."  Theodore 
of  Beza  considered  the  error  of  those  who  demanded 
freedom  of  conscience  "worse  than  the  tyranny  of  the 
Pope.  It  is  better  to  have  a  tyrant,  no  matter  how 
cruel  he  may  be,  than  to  let  everyone  do  as  he  pleases.'* 
He  maintained  that  the  sword  of  the  civil  authority 
should  punish  not  only  heretics,  but  also  those  who 
wished  heresy  to  go  unpunished.^  In  brief,  before  the 
Renaissance  there  were  very  few  who  taught  with  Huss^ 
that  a  heretic  ought  not  to  be  abandoned  to  the  secular 
arm  to  be  put  to  death.^ 

1  De  hcEreticis  a  civili  magistratu  puniendis,  Geneva,  1554;  translated  into 
French  by  Colladon  in  1559. 

2  In  his  treatise  De  Ecclesia.  This  was  the  eighteenth  article  of  the  heresies 
attributed  to  him. 

3  In  general,  the  Protestant  leaders  of  the  day  were  glad  of  the  execution 
of  Servetus.  Melancthon  wrote  to  Bullinger:  "I  am  astonished  that  some 
persons  denounce  the  severity  that  was  so  justly  used  in  that  case."  Among 
those  who  did  denounce  it  was  Nicolas  Zurkinden  of  Berne.  Cf.  his  letter 
in  the  CEuvres  completes  of  Calvin,  vol.  xv,  p.  19.  Sebastien  Castellio  published 
in  March,  1554,  his  Traite  des  heretiques,  a  savoir  s'il  faut  les  persecuter,  the 
oldest  and  one  of  the  most  eloquent  pamphlets  against  intolerance.  Cf. 
F.  Buisson,  op.  cit.,  ch.  xi.  This  is  the  pamphlet  that  Theodore  of  Beza 
tried  to  refute.        Castellio  then  attacked  Calvin  directly  in  a   new  work, 


THE    INQUISITION  225 

Such  severity,  nay,  such  cruelty,  shown  to  what  we 
would  call  "a  crime  of  opinion,"  is  hard  for  men  of  our 
day  to  understand.  ''To  comprehend  it,"  says  Lea, 
"we  must  picture  to  ourselves  a  stage  of  civilization 
in  many  respects  wholly  unlike  our  own.  Passions  were 
fiercer,  convictions  stronger,  virtues  and  vices  more  ex- 
aggerated, than  in  our  colder  and  self-contained  time. 
The  age,  moreover,  was  a  cruel  one.  .  .  .  We  have  only 
to  look  upon  the  atrocities  of  the  criminal  law  of  the 
Middle  Ages  to  see  how  pitiless  men  were  in  their  dealings 
with  one  another.  The  wheel,  the  caldron  of  boiling  oil, 
burning  alive,  tearing  apart  with  wild  horses,  were  the 
ordinary  expedients  by  which  the  criminal  jurist  sought 
to  deter  men  from  crime  by  frightful  examples  which 
would  make  a  profound  impression  on  a  not  over-sensitive 
population."  ^ 

Contra  libellum  Calvini  in  quo  osiendere  conatur  hcBreticos  jure  gladii  ccercendos 
esse,  which  was  not  pubHshed  until  1612,  in  Holland.  We  know  that  the 
Calvinists  of  our  day  utterly  repudiate  the  theory  of  Calvin.  On  November 
I,  1903,  the  city  of  Geneva  erected  a  statue  in  the  Place  de  Champel  where 
Servetus  had  been  burned,  with  this  inscription:  A  Michel  Servet.  Fils 
respectueux  et  reconnaissants  de  Calvin,  mais  condamnant  une  erreur  qui 
fut  celle  de  son  siecle,  et  fermement  attaches  a  la  liberte  de  conscience  selon 
les  vrais  principes  de  la  Reformation  et  de  I'Evangile,  nous  avons  eleve  ce 
monument  expiatoire,  le  27  octobre  1903. 

1  Lea,  op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  pp.  234,  235.  He  continues:  "An  Anglo-Saxon  law 
punishes  a  female  slave  convicted  of  theft,  by  making  eighty  other  female  slaves 
each  bring  three  pieces  of  wood  and  burn  her  to  death,  while  each  contributed 
a  fine  besides;  and  in  medieval  England,  burning  was  the  customary  penalty 
for  attempts  on  the  life  of  the  feudal  lord.  In  the  customs  of  Arques,  granted 
by  the  Abbey  of  Saint-Bertin  in  1231,  there  is  a  provision  that  if  a  thief  have 
a  concubine  who  is  his  accomplice,  she  is  to  be  buried  alive.  .  .  .  Frederic  II, 
16 


226  THE   INQUISITION 

When  we  consider  this  rigorous  civil  criminal  code, 
we  need  not  wonder  that  heretics,  who  were  considered 
the  worst  possible  criminals,  were  sent  to  the  stake. 

This  explains  why  intelligent  men,  animated  by  the 
purest  zeal  for  good,  proved  so  hard  and  unbending,  and 
used  without  mercy  the  most  cruel  tortures,  when  they 
thought  that  the  faith  or  the  salvation  of  souls  was  at 
stake.  ''With  such  men,"  says  Lea,  —  and  he  mentions 
among  others  Innocent  III  and  St.  Louis, ^  —  "it  was  not 

the  most  enlightened  prince  of  his  time,  burned  captive  rebels  to  death  in 
his  presence,  and  is  even  said  to  have  encased  them  in  lead  in  order  to  roast 
them  slowly.  In  1261,  St.  Louis  humanely  abolished  a  custom  of  Touraine 
by  which  the  theft  of  a  loaf  of  bread  or  a  pot  of  wine  by  a  servant  from  his 
master  was  punished  by  the  loss  of  a  limb.  In  Frisia,  arson  committed  at 
night  was  visited  with  burning  alive;  and  by  the  old  German  law,  the  penalty 
of  both  murder  and  arson  was  breaking  on  the  wheel.  In  France,  women 
were  customarily  burned  and  buried  alive  for  simple  felonies,  and  Jews  were 
hung  by  the  feet  between  two  savage  dogs,  while  men  were  boiled  to  death 
for  coining.  In  Milan,  Italian  ingenuity  exhausted  itself  in  devising  deaths 
of  lingering  torture  for  criminals  of  all  descriptions.  The  Carolina,  or 
criminal  code  of  Charles  V,  issued  in  1530,  is  a  hideous  calatogue  of  blinding, 
mutilation,  tearing  with  hot  pincers,  burning  alive,  and  breaking  on  the 
wheel.  In  England,  prisoners  were  boiled  to  death  even  as  lately  as  1542,  .  .  . 
and  the  barbarous  penalty  for  high  treason  was  hanging,  drawing  and  quar- 
tering." 

1  "Dominic  and  Francis,  Bonaventure  and  Thomas  Aquinas,  Innocent  III 
and  St.  Louis  were  types  in  their  several  ways,  of  which  humanity  in  any 
age  might  well  feel  proud,  and  yet  they  were  as  unsparing  of  the  heretic  as 
Ezzelin  da  Romano  was  of  his  enemies."  Lea,  op.  ciL,  vol.  i,  p.  234.  Lea 
seems  very  fond  of  making  such  exaggerated  statements.  We  know  that 
neither  St.  Francis  nor  Innocent  III  was  ever  present  at  any  bloody  execu- 
tions, nor  did  they  ever  approve  of  them.  The  case  of  St.  Dominic  is  not 
so  clear.  It  would  be  difficult  to  prove  that  he  ever  put  any  heretics  to  death, 
but  many  trustworthy  authors  like  the  Dominicans  Benoit  (Histoire  des 
Albigeois,  1691,  vol.  ii,  p.  129)  and  Percin  (Monumcnta  Conventus  Tholosani, 
1693,  pp.  84-89)  agree  in  giving  him  the  title  of  "the  first  Inquisitor."     Ber- 


THE    INQUISITION  227 

hope  of  gain,  or  lust  of  blood  or  pride  of  opinion,  or  wanton 
exercise  of  power,  but  sense  of  duty,  and  they  but  repre- 
sented what  was  universal  public  opinion  from  the  thir- 
teenth to  the  seventeenth  century."  ^ 

It  was,  therefore,  the  spirit  of  the  times,  the  Zeitgeist 
as  we  would  call  it  to-day,  that  was  responsible  for  the 
rigorous  measures  formerly  used  by  both  Church  and 
State  in  the  suppression  of  heresy.  The  other  reasons 
we  have  mentioned  are  only  subsidiary.  This  is  the  one 
reason  that  satisfactorily  explains  both  the  theories  and 
the  facts. 

But  an  explanation  is  something  far  different  from  a 
defence  of  an  institution.  To  explain  is  to  show  the  rela- 
tion of  cause  to  effect ;  to  defend  is  to  show  that  the  effect 
corresponds  to  an  ideal  of  justice.  Even  if  we  grant 
that  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition  did  correspond  to  a 
certain  ideal  of  justice,  that  ideal  is  certainly  not  ours 
to-day.     Let  us  go  into  this  question  more  thoroughly. 

It  is  obvious  that  we  must  strongly  denounce  all  the 
abuses  of  the  Inquisition  that  were  due  to  the  sins  of  in- 
dividuals, no  matter  what  their  source.  No  one,  for  in- 
stance, would  dream  of  defending  Cauchon,  the  iniquitous 


nard  Gui  declares  that  he  exercised  Inquisitionis  officium  contra  labem 
hcereticam  auctoritate  legati  Apostolica  sedis  sibi  commissum  in  partibus 
Tholosanis.  If  he  were  not  actually  an  Inquisitor,  he  at  least  was  employed 
by  Gregory  IX  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  Inquisition,  which  was  definitely 
established  in  1231. 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p-  234. 


228  THE   INQUISITION 

judge  of  Joan  of  Arc,  or  other  cruel  Inquisitors  who 
like  him  used  their  authority  to  punish  unjustly  sus- 
pects brought  before  their  tribunal.  From  this  stand- 
point, it  is  probable  that  many  of  the  sentences  of  the 
Inquisition  need  revision. 

But  can  we  rightly  consider  this  institution  "a  sublime 
spectacle  of  social  perfection,"  and  "a  model  of  justice"  ?  ^ 

To  call  the  Inquisition  a  model  of  justice  is  a  manifest 
exaggeration,  as  every  fair  student  of  its  history  must 
admit. 

The  Inquisitorial  procedure  was,  in  itself,  inferior  to  the 
accusatio,  in  which  the  accuser  assumed  the  burden  of 
publicly  proving  his  charges.  That  it  was  difficult  to  ob- 
serve this  method  of  procedure  in  heresy  trials  can  readily 
be  understood;  for  the  pcena  talionis  awaiting  the  accuser 
who  failed  to  substantiate  his  charges  was  calculated  to 
cool  the  ardor  of  many  Catholics,  who  otherwise  would 
have  been  eager  to  prosecute  heretics.  But  we  must 
grant  that  the  accusatio  in  criminal  law  allowed  a  greater 
chance  for  justice  to  be  done  than  the  inquisitio.  Be- 
sides, if  the  ecclesiastical  inquisitio  had  proceeded  like 
the  civil  inquisitio,  the  possibility  of  judicial  errors  might 
have  been  far  less.  "In  the  inquisitio  of  the  civil  law, 
the  secrecy  for  which  the  Inquisition  has  been  justly 
criticised,  did  not  exist;  the  suspect  was  cited,  and  a 

i"Uno  sublime  spectacolo  di  perfezione  sociale,"  says  the  author  of  an 
article  in  the  Civilta  Cattolica,  1853,  vol.  i,  p.  595  seq.,  cited  by  DoUinger, 
La  papaute,  1904,  p.  384,  n.  684. 


THE    INQUISITION  229 

copy  of  the  capitula  or  articuli  containing  the  charges  was 
given  to  him.  When  questioned,  he  could  either  confess 
or  deny  these  charges.  The  names  of  the  witnesses  who 
were  to  appear  against  him,  and  a  copy  of  their  testimony, 
were  also  supplied,  so  that  he  could  carry  on  his  defence 
either  by  objecting  to  the  character  of  his  accusers,  or  the 
tenor  of  their  charges.  Women,  minors  aged  fourteen, 
serfs,  enemies  of  the  prisoner,  criminals,  excommunicates, 
heretics,  and  those  branded  with  infamy  were  not  allowed 
to  testify.  All  testimony  was  received  in  writing.  The 
prisoner  and  his  lawyers  then  appeared  before  the  judge 
to  rebut  the  evidence  and  the  charges."  ^ 

In  the  ecclesiastical  procedure,  on  the  contrary,  the 
names  of  the  witnesses  were  withheld,  save  in  very  excep- 
tional cases;  any  one  could  testify,  even  if  he  were  a 
heretic;  the  prisoner  had  the  right  to  reject  all  whom  he 
considered  his  mortal  enemies,  but  even  then  he  had  to 
guess  at  their  names  in  order  to  invalidate  their  testimony; 
he  was  not  allowed  a  lawyer,  but  had  to  defend  himself 
in  secret.  Only  the  most  prejudiced  minds  can  consider 
such  a  procedure  the  ideal  of  justice.  On  the  contrary 
it  is  unjust  in  every  detail  wherein  it  differs  from  the 
inquisitio  of  the  civil  law. 

Certain  reasons  may  be  adduced  to  explain  the  attitude 
of  the  Popes,  who  wished  to  make  the  procedure  of  the 
Inquisition  as  secret  and  as  comprehensive  as  possible. 

*  Tanon,  op.,  cit.,  pp.  287,  288, 


230  THE   INQUISITION 

They  were  well  aware  of  the  danger  that  witnesses  would 
incur,  if  their  names  were  indiscreetly  revealed.  They 
knew  that  the  publicity  of  the  pleadings  would  certainly 
hinder  the  eificiency  of  heresy  trials.  But  such  con- 
siderations do  not  change  the  character  of  the  institution 
itself;  the  Inquisition  in  leaving  too  great  a  margin  to 
the  arbitrary  conduct  of  individual  judges,  at  once  fell 
below  the  standard  of  strict  justice. 

All  that  can  and  ought  to  be  said  in  the  defence  and  to 
the  honor  of  the  Roman  pontiffs  is  that  they  endeavored 
to  remedy  the  abuses  of  the  Inquisition.  With  this 
in  view,  Innocent  IV  and  Alexander  IV  obliged  the  In- 
quisitors to  consult  a  number  of  boni  viri  and  periti;  ^ 
Clement  V  forbade  them  to  render  any  grave  decision 
without  first  consulting  the  bishops,  the  natural  judges 
of  the  faith ;^  and  Boniface  VIII  recommended  them  to 
reveal  the  names  of  the  witnesses  to  the  prisoners,  if  they 
thought  that  this  revelation  would  not  be  prejudicial  to 
any  one. '  In  a  word,  they  wished  the  laws  of  justice  to 
be  scrupulously  observed,  and  at  times  mitigated.'*     But 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  139. 

2  Clementinae,  De  hareticis,  Decretal  Multorum  Querela,  cap.  i,  sect.  i. 
3"Cessante   vero   periculo   supradicto,   accusatorum   et   testium    nomina 

(prout  in  aliis  fit  judiciis)  publicentur.  Caeterum  in  his  omnibus  praecipimus, 
tarn  episcopos  quam  inquisitores  puram  et  providam  intentionem  habere,  ne 
ad  accusatorum  vel  testium  nomina  supprimenda,  ubi  est  securitas,  peri- 
culum    esse   dicant."     Sexto,    De   hcereticis,   cap.    xx;   cf.    Tanon,   op.    cit., 

P-  391- 

*  Dollinger  is  very  unjust  when  he  says:  "From  1200  to  1500  there  is  a 
long  uninterrupted  series  of  papal  decrees  on  the  Inquisition;  these  decrees 


THE    INQUISITION  231 

examined  in  detail,  these  laws  were  far  from  being  perfect. 

Antecedent  imprisonment  and  torture,  which  played  so 
important  a  part  in  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition,  were 
undoubtedly  very  barbarous  methods  of  judicial  prose- 
cution. Antecedent  imprisonment  may  be  justified  in 
certain  cases;  but  the  manner  in  which  the  Inquisitors 
conceived  it  was  far  from  just.  No  one  would  dare  de- 
fend to-day  the  punishment  known  as  the  career  durus, 
whereby  the  Inquisitors  tried  to  extort  confessions  from 
their  prisoners.^  They  rendered  it,  moreover,  all  the 
more  odious  by  arbitrarily  prolonging  its  horrors  and 
its  cruelty.^ 

It  is  harder  still  to  reconcile  the  use  of  torture  with 
any  idea  of  justice.  If  the  Inquisitors  had  stopped  at 
flogging,  which  according  to  St.  Augustine  was  admin- 
istered at  home,  in  school,  and  even  in  the  episcopal 
tribunals  of  the  early  ages,  and  is  mentioned  by  the 
Council  of  Agde,  in  506  and  the  Benedictine  rule,^  no  one 

increase  continually  in  severity  and  cruelty."  La  Papaute,  p.  102. 
Tanon  {op.  cit.,  p.  138)  writes  more  impartially:  "Clement  V,  instead  of 
increasing  the  powers  of  the  Holy  Office,  tried  rather  to  suppress  its 
abuses." 

1  We  say  nothing  here  of  the  ruses  adopted  to  obtain  the  arrest  of  heretics, 
or  to  discover  their  secrets.  Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit,  pp.  356-358;  Vidal,  Revue 
des  Questions  Historiques,  January,  1906,  pp.  102-105. 

2"Non  est  aliqualiter  relaxandus,  sed  detinendus  per  annos  plurimos  ut 
vexatio  det  intellectum."  Bernard  Gui,  Practica  Inquisitionis,  5  pars, 
formula  13,  p.  302.  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  419,  420,  Tanon,  op.  cit., 
PP-  361,  362. 

3  Cf .  supra,  p.  32,  n.  3. 


232  THE    INQUISITION 

would  have  been  greatly  scandalized.  We  might  perhaps 
have  considered  this  domestic  and  paternal  custom  a 
little  severe,  but  perfectly  consistent  with  the  ideas  men 
then  had  of  goodness.^  But  the  rack,  the  strappado,  and 
the  stake  were  peculiarly  inhuman  inventions.^  When 
the  pagans  used  them  against  the  Christians  of  the  first 
centuries,  all  agreed  in  stigmatizing  them  as  the  extreme 
of  barbarism,  or  as  inventions  of  the  devil.  Their 
character  did  not  change  when  the  Inquisition  began  to 
use  them  against  heretics.  To  our  shame  we  are  forced 
to  admit  that,  notwithstanding  Innocent  IV's  appeal  for 
moderation,^  the  brutality  of  the  ecclesiastical  tribunals 
was  often  on  a  par  with  the  tribunals  of  the  pagan 
persecutors.  Pope  Nicolas  I  thus  denounced  the  use  of 
torture  as  a  means  of  judical  inquiry :  "  Such  proceedings," 
he  says,  "are  contrary  to  the  law  of  God  and  of  man,  for 
a  confession  ought  to  be  spontaneous,  not  forced;  it  ought 
to  be  free  and  not  the  result  of  violence.  A  prisoner 
may  endure  all  the  torments  you  inflict  upon  him  without 
confessing  anything.  Is  not  that  a  disgrace  to  the  judge, 
and  an  evident  proof  of  his  inhumanity!  If,  on  the  con- 
trary, a  prisoner,  under  stress  of  torture,  acknowledges 

1  It  must  be  noted  that  flogging  could  be  and  was  sometimes  administered 
in  a  cruel  and  barbarous  manner,  so  that  it  became  a  frightful  punishment. 
Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  372. 

2  This  was  the  view  of  St.  Augustine,  Ep.  cxxxiii,  2. 

^  "  Citra  membri  diminutionem  et  mortis  periculum."  Bull  Ad  extirpanda, 
in  Eymeric,  Directorium  inguisitoruni.  Appendix,  p.  8. 


THE   INQUISITION  233 

himself  guilty  of  a  crime  he  never  committed,  is  not  the 
one  who  forced  him  to  lie,  guilty  of  a  heinous  crime?"  ^ 

The  penalties  which  the  tribunals  of  the  Inquisition 
inflicted  upon  heretics  are  harder  to  judge.  Let  us  ob- 
serve first  of  all  that  the  majority  of  the  heretics  aban- 
doned to  the  secular  arm  merited  the  most  severe 
punishment  for  their  crimes.  It  would  surely  have  been 
unjust  for  criminals  against  the  common  law  to  escape 
punishment  under  cover  of  their  religious  belief.  Crimes 
committed  in  the  name  of  religion  are  always  crimes,  and 
the  man  who  has  his  property  stolen  or  is  assaulted  cares 
little  whether  he  has  to  deal  with  a  religious  fanatic  or  an 
ordinary  criminal.  In  such  instances,  the  State  is  not  de- 
fending a  particular  dogmatic  teaching,  but  her  own  most 
vital  interests.  Heretics,  therefore,  who  were  criminals 
against  the  civil  law  were  justly  punished.  An  anti- 
social sect  like  the  Cathari,  which  shrouded  itself  in 
mystery  and  perverted  the  people  so  generally,  by  the 
very  fact  of  its  existence  and  propaganda  called  for  the 
vengeance  of  society  and  the  sword  of  the  State. 

"However  much,"  says  Lea,  "we  may  deprecate  the 
means  used  for  its  suppression,  and  commiserate  those 
who  suffered  for  conscience'  sake,  we  cannot  but  admit 
that  the  cause  of  orthodoxy  was  in  this  case  the  cause 

1  Responsa  ad  consulta  Bulgarorum,  cap.  Ixxxvi;  Labbe,  Concilia,  vol.  viii, 
col.  544.     Cf.  supra,  p.  148,  n.  3. 


234  THE    INQUISITION 

of  progress  and  civilization.  Had  Catharism  become 
dominant,  or  even  had  it  been  allowed  to  exist  on  equal 
terms,  its  influence  could  not  have  failed  to  prove  dis- 
astrous. Its  asceticism  with  regard  to  commerce  be- 
tween the  sexes,  if  strictly  enforced,  could  only  have  led 
to  the  extinction  of  the  race.  ...  Its  condemnation  of 
the  visible  universe,  and  of  matter  in  general  as  the 
work  of  Satan  rendered  sinful  all  striving  after  material 
improvement,  and  the  conscientious  belief  in  such  a  creed 
could  only  lead  man  back,  in  time,  to  his  original  con- 
dition of  savagism.  It  was  not  only  a  revolt  against 
the  Church,  but  a  renunciation  of  man's  domination  over 
nature."  ^  Its  growth  had  to  be  arrested  at  any  price. 
Society,  in  prosecuting  it  without  mercy,  was  only  defend- 
ing herself  against  the  working  of  an  essentially  destruc- 
tive force.     I.t  was  a  struggle  for  existence. 

We  must,  therefore,  deduct  from  the  number  of  those 
who  are  commonly  styled  the  victims  of  ecclesiastical 
intolerance,  the  majority  of  the  heretics  executed  by  the 
State;  for  nearly  all  that  were  imprisoned  or  sent  to  the 
stake,  especially  in  northern  Italy  and  southern  France, 
were  Cathari.^ 

This  important  observation  has  so  impressed  certain 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  io6. 

2  Jean  Guiraud  has  proved  that  the  Waldenses,  Fraticelli,  Hussites,  Lol- 
lards, etc.,  attacked  society,  which  acted  in  self-defence  when  she  put  them 
to  death.  La  repression  de  Vheresie  au  moyen  d-ge,  in  the  Questions  d'hisioire 
ei  d'archeologie  Chretienne,  p.  24  and  seq. 


THE   INQUISITION  235 

historians,  that  they  have  been  led  to  think  the  In- 
quisition dealt  only  with  criminals  of  this  sort.  "His- 
tory," says  one  of  them,  "has  preserved  the  record  of  the 
outrages  committed  by  the  heretics  of  Bulgaria,  the  Gnos- 
tics, and  the  Manicheans;  the  death  sentence  was  inflicted 
only  upon  criminals  who  confessed  their  murders,  rob- 
beries, and  acts  of  violence.  The  Albigenses  were  treated 
with  kindness.  The  Catholic  Church  deplores  all  acts 
of  vengeance,  however  strong  the  provocation  given  by 
these  factious  mobs."  ^ 

Such  a  defence  of  the  Inquisition  is  not  borne  out  by 
the  facts.  It  is  true,  of  course,  that  in  the  Middle  Ages 
there  was  hardly  a  heresy  which  had  not  some  connection 
with  an  anti-social  sect.  For  this  reason  any  one  who 
denied  a  dogma  of  the  faith  was  at  once  suspected, 
rightly  or  wrongly,  of  being  an  anarchist.  But  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  the  Inquisition  did  not  condemn  merely 
those  heresies  which  caused  social  upheaval,  but  all 
heresies  as  such:  "We  decree,"  says  Frederic  II,  "that 
the  crime  of  heresy,  no  matter  what  the  name  of  the 
sect,  be  classed  as  a  public  crime  .  .  .  and  that  every 
one  who  denies  the  Catholic  faith,  even  in  one  article, 
shall  be  liable  to  the  law:  si  inventi  fuertnt  a  fide  catholica 
saltern  in  articulo  deviare?  "     This  was  also  the  view  of 

1  Rodrigo,  Historia  verdadera  de  la  Inquisicion,  Madrid,   1876,  vol.  i, 
pp.  176,  177. 

2  Constitution  Inconsutilem  tunicam.     Cf.  supra,  p.  114,  n.  i. 


236  THE   INQUISITION 

the  theologians  and  the  canonists.  St.  Thomas  Aquinas, 
for  instance,  who  speaks  for  the  whole  schola,  did  not 
make  any  distinction  between  the  Catharan  heresy  and 
any  other  purely  speculative  heresy;  he  put  them  all  on 
one  level;  every  obdurate  or  relapsed  heretic  deserved 
death. ^  The  Inquisitors  were  so  fully  persuaded  of  this 
truth  that  they  prosecuted  heretics  whose  heresy  was 
not  discovered  until  ten  or  twenty  years  after  their  death, 
when  surely  they  were  no  longer  able  to  cause  any  injury 
to  society.^ 
We  need  not  wonder  at  these  views  and  practices,  for 

1  Summa  Ila,  Ilae,  q.  x,  art.  8;  q.  xi,  art.  3  and  4.  Mgr.  Douais  is  of 
a  different  opinion.  Recently  he  wrote:  "A  heretic  is  one  who  obstinately 
persists  in  his  error.  A  heretic  was  not  hable  to  the  Inquisition  for  holding 
or  expressing  opinions  which  were  more  or  less  contrary  to  the  teaching  of 
the  Church.  He  was  prosecuted  only  when  he  obstinately  persisted  in  holding 
doctrines,  which  were  utterly  subversive  not  only  of  dogma  but  of  church 
unity.  The  Insabbatati  (Waldenscs)  held  views  of  this  character,  etc.  .  .  . 
The  heretic  also  was  one  who  believed  such  errors  (Waldensian)  and  who  — 
be  it  understood  —  manifested  them  externally."  Douais,  Saint  Raymond 
dc  Pcnnajort  et  Ics  heretiqucs.  Directoire  a  I'usage  des  inquisitcurs  aragonais 
(1242),  in  Le  Moyen  Age,  vol.  iii  (1899),  p.  306.  But  unfortunately  the 
text  quoted  by  Mgr.  Douais  makes  no  such  distinction:  "Et  videtur  quod 
haeretici  sint  qui  in  suo  errore  perdurant  sicut  Insabbatati,"  etc.  "Credcntes 
vero  dictis  erroribus  (errors  of  the  Insabbatati)  similiter  haeretici  sunt  dicendi." 
Ibid.  In  making  special  mention  of  the  Waldenses,  the  Directorium  by  no 
means  excluded  other  heretics.  The  Waldenses  are  merely  cited  as  an 
example.  St.  Raymond  of  Pennafort  indeed  held  that  "whoever  obstinately 
persists  in  his  error  is  a  heretic."  In  fact,  the  commentary  of  Mgr.  Douais, 
which  we  have  given  above,  is  a  modern  view  entirely,  which  we  have  never 
seen  expressed  by  the  writers  of  the  Middle  Ages.  Cf.  supra,  p.  160  and 
notes. 

2  Cf.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  pp.  407-412;  Lea,  op.  cit.,  p.  448;  Molinier,  U Inqui- 
sition dans  le  Midi  de  la  France  au  XIII^  et  au  XI V^  siecle,  pp.  358- 
367- 


THE   INQUISITION  237 

they  were  fully  in  accord  with  the  notion  of  justice 
current  at  the  time.  The  rulers  in  Church  and  State 
felt  it  their  duty  not  only  to  defend  the  social  order,  but 
to  safeguard  the  interests  of  God  in  the  world.  They 
deemed  themselves  in  all  sincerity  the  representatives  of 
divine  authority  here  below.  God's  interests  were  their 
interests;  it  was  their  duty,  therefore,  to  punish  all 
crimes  against  his  law.  Heresy,  therefore,  a  purely  theo- 
logical crime,  became  amenable  to  their  tribunal.  In 
punishing  it,  they  believed  that  they  were  merely  fulfill- 
ing one  of  the  duties  of  their  office.^  We  have  now 
to  examine  and  judge  the  penalties  inflicted  upon  her- 
esy as  such. 

The  first  in  order  of  importance  was  the  death  penalty 
of  the  stake,  inflicted  upon  all  obdurate  and  relapsed 
heretics. 

Relapsed  heretics,  when  repentant,  did  not  at  first 
incur  the  death  penalty.  Imprisonment  was  considered 
an  adequate  punishment,^  for  it  gave  them  a  chance  to 

1  This  was  the  view  held  as  late  as  the  seventeenth  century.  After  the 
revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes,  Jurieu,  who  had  protested  most  strongly 
against  this  measure,  called  upon  the  princes  to  use  their  power  for  the  true 
religion,  and  the  pure  doctrine.  He  writes:  "Princes  and  magistrates  are 
the  anointed  of  God,  and  his  lieutenants  on  earth.  .  .  .  But  they  are  strange 
lieutenants  indeed,  if  as  magistrates  they  feel  no  special  obligation  to  God; 
how  then  can  we  imagine  a  Christian  magistrate,  the  lieutenant  of  God, 
fulfilling  all  the  duties  of  his  state,  if  he  does  not  feel  called  upon  to  prevent 
rebellion  against  God,  that  the  people  go  not  after  another  God,  or  serve  the 
true  God  in  a  way  He  does  not  will."  Cf.  Baudrillart,  U  Eglise  Catholique 
la  Renaissance,  le  Protestantisme,  1904,  pp.  234,  235. 

2  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  543-547- 


238  THE   INQUISITION 

expiate  their  fault.  The  death  penalty  inflicted  later  on 
placed  the  judges  in  a  false  position.  On  the  one  hand, 
by  granting  absolution  and  giving  communion  to  the 
prisoner,  they  professed  to  believe  in  the  sincerity  of 
his  repentance  and  conversion,  and  yet  by  sending  him 
to  the  stake  for  fear  of  a  relapse,  they  acted  contrary  to 
their  convictions.  To  condemn  a  man  to  death  who  was 
considered  worthy  of  receiving  the  Holy  Eucharist,  on 
the  plea  that  he  might  one  day  commit  the  sin  of  heresy 
again,  appears  to  us  a  crying  injustice. 

But  should  even  unrepentant  heretics  be  put  to  death? 
No,  taught  St.  Augustine,  and  most  of  the  early  Fathers, 
who  invoked  in  favor  of  the  guilty  ones  the  higher  law 
of  "charity  and  Christian  gentleness."  ^  Their  doctrine 
certainly  accorded  perfectly  with  our  Savior's  teach- 
ing, in  the  parable  of  the  cockle  and  the  good  grain. 
As  Wazo,  Bishop  of  Liege  said:  "May  not  those  who 
are  to-day  cockle  become  wheat  to-morrow?"^  But  in 
decreeing  the  death  of  these  sinners,  the  Inquisitors  at 
once  did  away  with  the  possibility  of  their  conversion. 
Certainly  this  was  not  in  accordance  with  Christian  char- 
ity. Such  severity  can  only  be  defended  by  the  authority 
of  the  old  law,  whose  severity,  according  to  the  early 
Fathers,  had  been  abolished  by  the  law  of  Christ.^ 

^Cf.  supra,  pp.  3,  4,  17,  28. 

2  Viki  Vasonis,  cap.  xxv,  in  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cxlii,  col.  753. 
3  St.  Optatus  {De  Schismate  Donatistarum,  lib.  iii,  cap.  vi  and  vii)  was  one 
of  the  first  of  the  Fathers  to  quote  the  Old  Testament  as  his  authority  for 


THE   INQUISITION  239 

Advocates  of  the  death  penalty,  like  Frederic  II  and 
St.  Thomas,  tried  to  defend  their  view  by  arguments  from 
reason.  Criminals  guilty  of  treason,  and  counterfeiters 
are  condemned  to  death.  Therefore,  heretics  who  are 
traitors  and  falsifiers  merit  the  same  penalty.  But  a 
comparison  of  this  kind  is  not  necessarily  a  valid  argu- 
ment. The  criminals  in  question  were  a  grave  menace 
to  the  social  order.  But  we  cannot  say  as  much  for 
each  and  every  heresy  in  itself.  It  was  unjust  to  place  a 
crime  against  society  and  a  sin  against  God  on  an  equal 
footing.  Such  reasoning  would  prove  that  all  sins  were 
crimes  of  treason  against  God,  and  therefore  merited 
death. ^  Is  not  a  sacrilegious  communion  the  worst 
possible  insult  to  the  divine  majesty?  Must  we  argue, 
therefore,  that  every  unworthy  communicant,  if  unre- 
pentant, must  be  sent  to  the  stake? 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  neither  reason,  Christian 
tradition,  nor  the  New  Testament  call  for  the  infliction  of 
the  death  penalty  upon  heretics.     The  interpretation  of 

the  infliction  of  the  death  penalty  upon  heretics.  But  in  this  he  was  not  fol- 
lowed either  by  his  contemporaries  or  his  immediate  successors.  Before  him, 
Origen  and  St.  Cyprian  had  protested  against  this  appeal  to  the  Mosaic  law. 
Cf.  Supra,  pp.  3  and  4. 

1  Mgr.  Bonomelli,  Bishop  of  Cremona,  writes:  "In  the  Middle  Ages,  they 
reasoned  thus:  If  rebellion  against  the  prince  deserves  death,  a  fortiori  does 
rebeUion  against  God.  Singular  logic!  It  is  not  very  hard  to  put  one's 
finger  upon  the  utter  absurdity  of  such  reasoning.  For  every  sinner  is  a 
rebel  against  God's  law.  It  follows  then  that  we  ought  to  condemn  all 
men  to  death,  beginning  with  the  kings  and  the  legislators";  quoted  by 
Morlais  in  the  Revue  du  derge  frangais,  August  i,  1905,  p.  457.  Cf.  supra^ 
p.  5.  n.  I. 


240  THE   INQUISITION 

St.  John  XV.  6:  Si  quis  in  me  non  7nanserit,  in  ignem  mit- 
ient  et  ardet,  made  by  the  mediaeval  canonists,^  is  not 
worth  discussing.  It  was  an  abuse  of  the  accommodated 
sense  which  bordered  on  the  ridiculous,  although  its  con- 
sequences were  terrible. 

Modern  apologists  have  clearly  recognized  this.  For 
that  reason  they  have  tried  their  best  to  show  that  the 
execution  of  heretics  was  solely  the  work  of  the  civil 
power,  and  that  the  Church  was  in  no  way  responsible. 

"When  we  argue  about  the  Inquisition,"  says  Joseph  de 
Maistre,  "let  us  separate  and  distinguish  very  carefully 
the  role  of  the  Church  and  the  role  of  the  State.  All  that 
is  terrible  and  cruel  about  this  tribunal,  especially  its 
death  penalty,  is  due  to  the  State;  that  was  its  business, 
and  it  alone  must  be  held  to  an  accounting.  All  the 
clemency,  on  the  contrary,  which  plays  so  large  a  part  in 
the  tribunal  of  the  Inquisition  must  be  ascribed  to  the 
Church,  which  interfered  in  its  punishments  only  to 
suppress  and  mitigate  them."  ^  "The  Church,"  says  an- 
other grave  historian,  "took  no  part  in  the  corporal 
punishment  of  heretics.  Those  executed  were  simply 
punished  for  their  crimes,  and  were  condemned  by  judges 
acting  under  the  royal  seal."  ^    "This,"  says  Lea,  "is  a 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  177. 

^  Lettres  a  un  gentilhomme  russe  sur  V Inquisition  espagnole,  ed.  1864, 
pp.  17,  18,  28,  34. 

3  Rodrigo,  Historia  verdadera  de  la  Inquisicion,  1876,  vol.  i,  p.  176. 


THE    INQUISITION  241 

typical  instance  in  which  history  is  written  to  order.^ 
.  .  .  It  is  altogether  a  modern  perversion  of  history  to 
assume,  as  apologists  do,  that  the  request  for  mercy  was 
sincere,  and  that  the  secular  magistrate  and  not  the  In- 
quisition was  responsible  for  the  death  of  the  heretic. 
We  can  imagine  the  smile  of  amused  surprise  with  which 
Gregory  IX  and  Gregory  XI  would  have  listened  to  the 
dialectics  with  which  Count  Joseph  de  Maistre  proves 
that  it  is  an  error  to  suppose,  and  much  more  to  assert, 
that  a  Catholic  priest  can  in  any  manner  be  instrumental 
in  compassing  the  death  of  a  fellow  creature."  ^ 

The  real  share  of  the  Inquisition  in  a  condemnation  in- 
volving the  death  penalty  is  indeed  a  very  diificult  ques- 
tion to  determine.  According  to  the  letter  of  the  papal 
and  imperial  Constitutions  of  1231  and  1232,  the  civil 
and  not  the  ecclesiastical  tribunals  assumed  all  responsi- 
bility for  the  death  sentence;^  the  Inquisition  merely 
decided  upon  the  question  of  doctrine,  leaving  the 
rest  to  the  secular  Court.  It  is  this  legislation  that 
the  above  named  apologists  have  in  mind,  and  the 
text  of  these  laws  is  on  their  side. 

1  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  540. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  227,  228. 

3"Dampnati  vero  per  Ecclesiam,  seculari  judicio  relinqimntur,  animad- 
versione  debita  puniendi."  Decretals,  cap.  xv,  De  hareticis,  lib.  v,  tit.  vii. 
"Haeretici  .  .  .  ,  ubicumque  per  imperium  dampnati  ab  Ecclesia  fuerint  et 
seculari  judicio  assignati,"  etc.,  Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  sect,  iv,  vol.  ii,  p.  196. 
The  Processus  Inquisitionis,  written  between  1244  and  1254,  also  says:  "Per 
sententiam  definitivam  hcBreticum  judicamus,  relinguentes  ex  nunc  judicio 
seculari."     Cf.  Appendix  A. 

17 


242  THE   INQUISITION 

But  when  we  consider  how  these  laws  were  carried  out  in 
practice,  we  must  admit  that  the  Church  did  have  some 
share  in  the  death  sentence.  We  have  already  seen  that 
the  Church  excommunicated  those  princes  who  refused 
to  burn  the  heretics  which  the  Inquisition  handed  over 
to  them.^  The  princes  were  not  really  judges  in  this 
case;  the  right  to  consider  questions  of  heresy  was  for- 
mally denied  them.^  It  was  their  duty  simply  to  register 
the  decree  of  the  Church,  and  to  enforce  it  according  to 
the  civil  law.^  In  every  execution,  therefore,  a  twofold 
authority  came  into  play:  the  civil  power  which  carried 
out  its  own  laws,  and  the  spiritual  power  which  forced 
the  State  to  carry  them  out.  That  is  why  Peter  Cantor 
declared  that  the  Cathari  ought  not  to  be  put  to  death 
after  an  ecclesiastical  trial,  lest  the  church  be  compro- 
mised: " Illud  ah  eo  fit,  cujus  auctoritate  fit''  he  said,  to 
justify  his  recommendation.^ 

1  Cf.  supra  p.  147  and  note. 

2  Boniface  VIII  declares  expressly  that  the  judgment  of  heretics  is  purely 
ecclesiastical:  "Prohibemus  quoque  districtius  potestatibus,  dominis  tempo- 
ralibus  et  rectoribus  eorumdemque  officialibus  supradictis  ne  ipsi  de  hoc 
crimine  (cum  mere  sit  ecclesiasticum)  quoquo  modo  cognoscant  et  judicent." 
The  sentence  of  the  Inquisitors  put  an  end  to  the  trial:  donee  eorum  nogotium 
per  Ecclesi(Z  judicium  terminetur.  Cf.  Sexto,  v.  ii,  cap.  xi.  and  xviii,  De 
hcereticis,  in  Eymeric,  Directorum,  p.  no.  Cf.  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  pp.  539, 
540. 

3  This  is  what  Boniface  expressly  says;  loc  cit. 

■^''Sed  nee  convicti  ab  hujusmodi  judicio  (the  ordeals  were  in  question) 
tradendi  essent  morti,  quia  hoc  judicium  quodammodo  est  ecclesiasticum, 
quod  non  exercetur  sine  praesentia  sacerdotis,  per  quod,  cum  traditur  morti, 
a  sacerdote  traditur;  quia  illud  ab  eo  fit  cujus  auctoritate  fit."  Verbum 
abbreviaium,  cap.  Ixxviii,  P.  L.,  vol.  ccv,  col.  231. 


THE   INQUISITION  243 

It  is  therefore  erroneous  to  pretend  that  the  Church 
had  absolutely  no  part  in  the  condemnation  of  heretics 
to  death.  It  is  true  that  this  participation  of  hers  was 
not  direct  and  immediate;  but  even  though  indirect,  it 
was  none  the  less  real  and  efficacious.^ 

The  judges  of  the  Inquisition  realized  this,  and  did  their 
best  to  free  themselves  of  this  responsibility  which  weighed 
rather  heavily  upon  them.  Some  maintained  that  in 
compelling  the  civil  authority  to  enforce  the  existing 
laws,  they  were  not  going  outside  their  spiritual  office, 
but  were  merely  deciding  a  case  of  conscience.  But  this 
theory  was  unsatisfactory.  To  reassure  their  consciences, 
they  tried  another  expedient.  In  abandoning  heretics 
to  the  secular  arm,  they  besought  the  state  officials  to 
/^act  with  moderation,  and  avoid  "all  bloodshed  and  all 
^  danger  of  death."  ^  This  was  unfortunately  an  empty 
formula  which  deceived  no  one.  It  was  intended  to 
safeguard  the  principle  which  the  Church  had  taken  for 
her  motto:  Ecclesia  ahhorret  a  sanguine.  In  strongly 
asserting  this  traditional  law,  the  Inquisitors  imagined  that 
they  thereby  freed  themselves  from  all  responsibility,  and 

1  In  Spain,  the  manner  in  which  the  Inquisition  abandoned  heretics  to  the 
secular  arm  denoted  a  real  participation  of  the  State  in  the  execution  of 
heretics.  The  evening  before  the  execution  the  Inquisitors  brought  the 
King  a  small  fagot  tied  with  ribbons.  The  King  at  once  requested 
"that  this  fagot  be  the  first  thrown  upon  the  fire  in  his  name."  Cf.  Baudril- 
lart,  A  propos  de  r Inquisition,  in  the  Revue  pratique  d' Apologetique,  July  15, 
1906,  p.  354,  note. 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  178. 


244  THE    INQUISITION 

kept  from  imbruing  their  hands  in  bloodshed.  We  must 
take  this  for  what  it  is  worth.  It  has  been  styled  "cun- 
ning "and  "hypocrisy";^  let  us  call  it  simplya  legal  fiction.^ 


*  Lea,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  224. 

2  The  following  text,  taken  from  a  Liber  Peniientialis  of  the  thirteenth 
century,  shows  what  efforts  the  canonists  made  to  free  the  Church  from  all 
responsibility  in  condemning  heretics  to  death.  We  quote  it  from  Dollinger, 
Beiirdge,  vol.  2,  pp.  621,  622.  "Cum  secundum  prap.dicta  constat  ecclesiam 
non  debere  sanguinem  effundere  neque  manu  neque  lingua,  videtur  esse 
reprobabile  quod  cum  hajretici  et  Publicani  convincuntur  in  foro  ecclesiastico 
de  infidelitate  sua,  statim  traduntur  curiae,  id  est  seculari  potestati  ad  com- 
burendum  vel  occidendum,  et  quod  pejus  est  non  possunt  evadere  quin 
occidantur,  vel  judicium  subeant  ferri  candentis.  Si  enim  veros  se  dicunt 
esse  Christianos,  non  creditur  eis,  nisi  per  judicium  ferri  candentis  probent: 
si  vero  dixerint  se  fuisse  ha^reticos,  sed  veros  modo  poenitentes,  non  creditur 
eis  nisi  simili  modo  hoc  probent,  cum  tamen  non  sit  tutum  viro  ecclesiastico 
hoc  modo  tentare  Deum.  Si  autem  in  tali  judicio  deprehensi  fuerint  et  se 
esse  haereticos  et  poenitere  nolle  confessi,  statim  occiduntur.  Videtur  tamen 
eadem  observatio  de  eis  esse  consideranda  qua3  observatur  de  Juda;is,  de 
quibus  scriptum  est:  Ne  occidas  eos,  ne  quando  obliviscantur.  Si  enim 
volunt  esse  sub  jugo  nostras  servitutis  in  pace  neque  fidem  nostram  impugnare 
neque  nos,  sustinendi  sunt  inter  nos  et  deputandi  ad  sordida  officia,  ne  se 
possint  extoUcre  super  Christianos.  Verumtamen  ideo  praecipue  sustinentur 
Judaji,  quia  capsarii  nostri  sunt,  et  portant  testimonium  legis  contra  se  pro 
nobis.  A  multis  etiam  bonis  viris  audivimus  quod  si  haeretici  vel  excommuni- 
cati  contra  Christianos  velint  insurgere  vel  impugnare  fidem  publicis  per- 
suasionibus  et  pra^dicationibus,  non  est  peccatum  eos  occidere,  sed  si  quieti 
velint  esse  et  pacific!,  non  sunt  occidendi,  quod  videtur  posse  haberi  ex  canone 
ita  dicente:  Excommunicatorum  interfectoribus,  prout  in  ordine  Rom. 
ecclesiae  didicisti  secundum  intentionem  modum  congruum  satisfactionis 
injunge.  Non  enim  eos  homicidas  arbitramur,  quos,  adversus  excommuni- 
catos  catholicje  zelo  matris  ecclesiae  ardentes,  aliquos  eorum  trucidasse  con- 
tigerit  (cf.  Gratiani  Decretum,  Causa  23,  q.  5,  cap.  47).  Nee  credimus  quod 
haeretici  super  infidelitate  sua  in  foro  ecclesiastico  condemnati  curiae  sunt 
tradendi,  ita  quod  a  sacerdotibus  dicatur  judicibus:  Occidite  istos  haereticos: 
sed  sustinet  ecclesia  ut  statim  rapiantur  a  viris  saecularibus  ad  supplicium, 
nee  aliquod  eis  prasstat  patrocinium  sicut  Judaeis,  et  sicut  etiam  praestat 
clericis  degradatis." 


THE    INQUISITION  245 

The  penalty  of  life  imprisonment  and  the  penalty  of 
confiscation  inflicted  upon  so  many  heretics,  was  like  the 
death  penalty  imposed  only  by  the  secular  arm.  We 
must  add  to  this  banishment,  which  was  inscribed  in  the 
imperial  legislation,  and  reappeared  in  the  criminal  codes 
of  Lucius  III  and  Innocent  III.  These  several  penalties 
were  by  their  nature  vindicative.  For  this  reason  they 
were  particularly  odious,  and  have  been  the  occasion  of 
bitter  accusations  against  the  Church. 

With  the  exception  of  imprisonment,  which  we  will 
speak  of  later  on,  these  penalties  originated  with  the 
State. ^  It  is  important,  therefore,  to  know  what  crimes 
they  punished.  As  a  general  rule  it  must  be  admitted 
that  they  were  only  inflicted  upon  those  heretics  who 
seriously  disturbed  the  social  order.  If  the  death  pen- 
alty could  be  justly  meted  out  to  such  rioters,  with  still 
greater  reason  could  the  lesser  penalties  be  inflicted. 

The  penalty  of  confiscation  was  especially  cruel,  inas- 
much as  it  affected  the  posterity  of  the  condemned 
heretics.     According  to  the  old  Roman  law,  the  property 

*  "Gratian,  in  qu.  7,  Causa  23  of  the  Decretum,  proves  that  the  property 
of  heretics  should  be  confiscated  on  the  authority  of  St.  Augustine,  who 
himself  founds  it  on  the  Roman  law;  his  interpreters  unanimously  refer  it  to 
this  law,  as  its  true  origin,"  etc.  Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  524.  "His  auctoritatibus 
liquido  monstratur,  quod  ea  quae  ab  haereticis  male  possidentur,  a  catholicis 
juste  auferuntur."  Gratian,  Decretum,  4,  causa  xxiii,  quasst.  vii,  in  fine. 
"Imperatorum  siquidem  jure  statutum  est,  ut  quicumque  a  catholica  unitate 
inventus  fuerit  deviare,  suarum  rerum  debeat  omnimodam  prasscriptionem 
perferre."  Summa  Rolandi,  ed.  Thaner,  Inspruck,  1874,  p.  96.  Roland 
became  Pope  under  the  name  of  Alexander  II. 


246  THE   INQUISITION 

of  heretics  could  be  inherited  by  their  orthodox  sons,  and 
even  by  their  agnates  and  cognates.^  The  laws  of  the 
Middle  Ages  declared  confiscation  absolute;  on  the  plea 
that  heresy  should  be  classed  with  treason,  orthodox 
children  could  not  inherit  the  property  of  their  heretical 
father.^  There  was  but  one  exception  to  this  law.  Fred- 
eric II  and  Innocent  IV  both  decreed  that  children  could 
inherit  their  father's  property,  if  they  denounced  him  for 
heresy.^  It  is  needless  to  insist  upon  the  odious  char- 
acter of  such  a  law.  We  cannot  understand  to-day 
how  Gregory  IX  could  rejoice  on  learning  that  fathers 
did  not  scruple  to  denounce  their  children,  children 
their  parents,  a  wife  her  husband  or  a  mother  her 
children.* 

Granting  that  banishment  and  confiscation  were  just 
penalties  for  heretics  who  were  also  State  criminals,  was 
it  right  for  the  church  to  employ  this  penal  system  for 
the  suppression  of  heresy  alone? 

1  4  and  19,  cap.  De  luBreticis,  iv,  5,  Manichceos  and  Cognovimus. 

'^  Decretal  Vergentis  of  Innocent  III.  Decretals,  cap.  x,  De  hcereticis 
lib.  V,  tit.  vii. 

3  Law  of  Frederic:  Commissis  nobis  calitus  of  March,  1232,  incorporated 
into  the  Decretal  of  Innocent  IV,  October  31,  1243:  "Nee  quidem  a  miseri- 
cordiae  finibus  duximus  excludendum,  ut,  si  qui  paternae  hasresis  non  sequaces, 
latentam  patrum  perfidiam  revelaverint,  quacumque  reatus  illorum  animad- 
versione  plectantur,  prasdictas  punitioni  non  subjaceat  innocentia  filiorum." 
Mon.  Germ.,  Leges,  vol.  ii,  sect,  iv,  p.  197;  Ripoll,  Bullarium  ordinis  Pradicat., 
vol.  i,  p.  126. 

*"Ita  quod  pater  filio  vel  uxori,  filius  ipse  patri,  uxor  propriis  filiis  aut 
marito  vel  consortibus  ejusdem  criminis,  in  hac  parte  sibi  aliquatenus  non 
parcebant."     Bull  Gaudemus,  of  April  12,  1233,  in  Ripoll,  vol.  i,  p.  56. 


THE    INQUISITION  247 

It  is  certain  that  the  early  Christians  would  have 
strongly  denounced  such  laws  as  too  much  like  the 
pagan  laws  under  which  they  were  persecuted.  St.  Hil- 
ary voiced  their  mind  when  he  said:  "The  Church 
threatens  exile  and  imprisonment;  she  in  whom  men 
formerly  believed  while  in  exile  and  prison,  now  wishes 
to  make  men  believe  her  by  force."  ^  St.  Augustine  was 
of  the  same  mind.  He  thus  addressed  the  Manicheans, 
the  most  hated  sect  of  his  time:  "Let  those  who  have 
never  known  the  troubles  of  a  mind  in  search  for  the 
truth,  proceed  against  you  with  rigor.  It  is  impossible 
for  me  to  do  so,  for  I  for  years  was  cruelly  tossed  about 
by  your  false  doctrines,  which  I  advocated  and  defended 
to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I  ought  to  bear  with  you 
now,  as  men  bore  with  me,  when  I  blindly  accepted 
your  doctrines."^  Wazo,  Bishop  of  Liege,  wrote  in  a 
similar  strain  in  the  eleventh  century.^ 

But  continued  St.  Augustine,  retracting  his  first 
theory  —  and  nearly  all  the  Middle  Ages  agreed  with  him, 
—  "  these  severe  penalties  are  lawful  and  good  when  they 
serve  to  convert  heretics  by  inspiring  them  with  a  salutary 
fear."^    The  end  here  justifies  the  means. 


1  Liher  contra  Auxeniium,  cap.  iv;  cf.  supra,  p.  6. 

2  Contra  epistolam  ManichcBi,  quam  vocant  Fundamenti,  n.  2  and  3,  supra, 
p.  12. 

3  Vita  Vasonis,  cap.  xxv  and  xxvi,  Migne,  P.  L.,  vol.  cxlii,  col.  752,  753; 
cf.  supra,  p.  51. 

4  Cf.  supra,  p.  21,  n.  i. 


248  THE   INQUISITION 

Such  reasoning  was  calculated  to  lead  men  to  great  ex- 
tremes, and  was  responsible  for  the  cruel  teaching  of  the 
theologians  of  the  school,  who  were  more  logically  consist- 
ent than  the  Bishop  of  Hippo.  They  endeavored  to 
terrorize  heretics  by  the  specter  of  the  stake.  St.  Augus- 
tine, bold  as  he  was,  shrank  from  such  barbarity.  But 
if,  on  his  own  admission,  the  logical  consequences  of  the 
principle  he  laid  down  were  to  be  rejected,  did  not  this 
prove  the  principle  itself  false? 

If  we  consider  merely  the  immediate  results  obtained 
by  the  use  of  brute  force,  we  may  indeed  admit  that  it 
benefited  the  Church  by  bringing  back  some  of  her  erring 
children.  But  at  the  same  time  these  cruel  measures 
turned  away  from  Catholicism  in  the  course  of  ages 
many  sensitive  souls,  who  failed  to  recognize  Christ's 
Church  in  a  society  which  practiced  such  cruelty  in 
union  with  the  State.  According,  therefore,  to  St. 
Augustine's  own  argument,  his  theory  has  been  proved 
false  by  its  fatal  consequences. 

We  must,  therefore,  return  to  the  first  theory  of  St. 
Augustine,  and  be  content  to  win  heretics  back  to  the 
true  faith  by  purely  moral  constraint.  The  penalties, 
decreed  or  consented  to  by  the  Church,  ought  to  be 
medicinal  in  character,  viz.,  pilgrimages,  flogging,  wear- 
ing the  crosses,  and  the  like.  Imprisonment  may  even 
be  included  in  the  list,  for  temporary  imprisonment  has 
a  well-defined  expiatory  character.     In  fact  that  is  why 


THE   INQUISITION  249 

in  the  beginning  the  monasteries  made  it  the  punishment 
for  heresy.^  If  later  on  the  Church  frequently  inflicted 
the  penalty  of  life  imprisonment,  she  did  so  because,  by 
a  legal  fiction,  she  attributed  to  it  a  purely  penitential 
character.^  Anyone  of  these  punishments,  therefore, 
may  be  considered  lawful,  provided  it  is  not  arbitrarily 
inflicted.  This  theory  does  not  permit  the  Church  to 
abandon  impenitent  heretics  to  the  secular  arm.  It 
grants  her  only  the  right  of  excommunication,  according 
to  the  penitential  discipline  and  the  primitive  canon  law 
of  the  days  of  Tertullian,  Cyprian,  Origen,  Lactantius, 
and  Hilary.^ 

But  is  this  return  to  antiquity  conformable  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Church?  Can  it  be  reconciled  in  particular 
with  one  of  the  condemned  propositions  of  the  Syllabus: 
Ecclesia  vis  injerendce  potestatem  non  habet?^  The  Church 
has  no  right  to  use  force. 

Without  discussing  this  proposition  at  length,  let  us 


1  Cf.  supra,  pp.  32,  S3- 

2  "  The  penal  code  of  the  Inquisition  ...  is  worth  studying  as  the  concept 
of  a  pecuUar  system  which  tried  to  reconcile  the  severest  methods  of  sup- 
pression with  the  principles  of  ecclesiastical  penalty  and  discipline,  by  ficti- 
tiously attributing  a  purely  penitential  character  to  all  penalties  except  death, 
even  to  life  imprisonment,"  etc.     Tanon,  op.  cit.,  p.  iii. 

3  "Nunc  autem,  quia  circumcisio  spiritalis  esse  apud  fideles  servos  Dei 
coepit,"  says  St.  Cyprian,  "spintali  gladio  superbi  et  contumaces  necantur 
dum  de  Ecclesia  ejiciuntur."  Cypriani,  Ep.  Ixii,  ad  Pomponium,  no  4,  P.  L., 
vol.  iii,  col.  371.     Cf.  supra,  pp.  2-7. 

^  Proposit,  xxiv. 


250  THE   INQUISITION 

first  state  that  authorities  are  not  agreed  on  its  precise 
meaning.  Every  Catholic  will  admit  that  the  Church 
has  a  coercive  power,  in  both  the  external  and  the  in- 
ternal forum.  But  the  question  under  dispute  —  and 
this  the  Syllabus  does  not  touch  —  is  whether  the  coer- 
cive power  comprises  merely  spiritual  penalties,  or  tem- 
poral and  corporal  penalties  as  well.^  The  editor  of  the 
Syllabus  did  not  decide  this  question;  he  merely  referred 
us  to  the  letter  Ad  apostolicce  Sedis  of  August  22,  1851. 
But  this  letter  is  not  at  all  explicit;  it  merely  condemns 
those  who  pretend  "to  deprive  the  Church  of  the  external 
jurisdiction  and  coercive  power,  which  was  given  her  to 
win  back  sinners  to  the  ways  of  righteousness."  We 
would  like  to  find  more  light  on  this  question  elsewhere. 
But  the  theologians  who  at  the  Vatican  Council  prepared 
canons  10  and  12  of  the  schema  De  Ecclesia  on  this  very 
point  of  doctrine  did  not  remove  the  ambiguity.  They 
explicitly  affirmed  that  the  Church  had  the  right  to  ex- 
ercise over  her  erring  children  "constraint  by  an  external 
judgment  and  salutary  penalties,"  but  they  said  nothing 
about  the  nature  of  these  penalties.^      Was   not   such 

1  Gayraud,  Discourse  delivered  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  January  28, 
1901. 

2  "Cum  vero  Ecclesiae  potestates  alia  sit  et  dicatur  ordinis,  alia  jurisdic- 
tionis:  de  hac  altera  speciatim  docemus,  earn  non  esse  solum  fori  interni  et 
sacramentalis,  sed  etiam  fori  extern!  ac  publici,  absolutam  atque  omnino 
plenam,  nimirum  legiferam,  judiciariam,  coercitivam.  Potestatis  autem 
hujusmodi  subjectum  sunt  Pastores  et  Doctores  a  Christo  dati,  qui  eam 
libere  et  a  quavis  saeculari  dominatione  independcnter  exercent;  adeoque 
cum  omni  imperio  regunt   Ecclesiam   Dei  tum   necessaris  et  conscientiam 


THE    INQUISITION  251 

silence  significant?  It  authorized,  one  may  safely  say, 
the  opinion  of  those  who  limited  the  coercive  power  of 
the  Church  to  merely  moral  constraint.  Cardinal  Soglia, 
in  a  work  approved  by  Gregory  XVI  and  Pius  IX,  de- 
clared that  this  opinion  was  ''more  in  harmony  with  the 
gentleness  of  the  Church."^  It  also  has  in  its  favor 
Popes  Nicholas  I  ^  and  Celestine  III,^  who  claimed  for  the 
Church  of  which  they  were  the  head  the  right  to  use  only 
the  spiritual  sword.  Without  enumerating  all  the  mod- 
ern authors  who  hold  this  view,  we  will  quote  a  work 
which  has  just  appeared  with  the  imprimatur  of  Father 
Lepidi,  the  Master  of  the  Sacred  Palace,  in  which  we 
find  the  two  following  theses  proved:  i.  "Constraint,  in 
the  sense  of  employing  violence  to  enforce  ecclesiastical 


quoque  obligantibus  legibus,  turn  decretoriis  judiciis,  turn  denique  salutaribus 
pcBuis  in  sontes  etiam  invitos,  nee  solum  in  iis  quae  fidem  et  mores,  cultura  et 
sanctificationem,  sed  etiam  in  iis  quae  externam  Ecclesias  disciplinam  et 
administrationem  respiciunt."  Can.  lo.  "Si  quis  dixerit,  a  Christo  Domino 
et  Salvatore  nostro  EcclesicC  suce  collatam  tantum  fuisse  potestatem  dirigendi 
per  consilia  et  suasiones,  non  vero  jubendi  per  leges,  ac  devios  contumacesque 
exteriori  judicio  ac  salubribus  pcenis  coercendi  atque  cogendi,"  etc.    Can.  12. 

1  "Sunt  enim  qui  docent  potestatem  coercitivam  divinitus  Ecclesiae  collatam 
paenis  tantummodo  spiritualibus  contineri  .  ,  .  Sententia  (haec)  prior  magis 
Ecclesiae  mansuetudini  consentanea  videtur."  Institutiones  juris  publici 
ecdesiastici,  5  ed.,  Paris,  vol.  i,  pp.  169,  170. 

2  "Ecclesia  gladium  non  habet  nisi  spiritualem."  Nicolai,  Ep.  ad  Albinum 
archiepiscop.,  in  the  Decretum,  Causa  xxxiii,  quasst.  ii,  cap.  Inter  h(BC.  Note, 
however,  that  the  Pope  was  not  treating  this  particular  question  ex  professo. 

3  Celestine,  according  to  the  criminal  code  of  his  day,  declared  that  a 
guilty  cleric,  once  excommunicated  and  anathematized,  ought  to  be  aban- 
doned to  the  secular  arm,  cum  Ecclesia  non  Jmbeat  ultra  quid  facial.  Decre- 
tals, cap.  X,  De  judiciis,  lib.  ii,  tit.  i.  This  was  the  common  teaching.  Cf. 
supra,  p.  136,  n.  3. 


252  THE   INQUISITION 

laws,  originated  with  the  State."  2.  "The  constraint  of 
ecclesiastical  laws  is  by  divine  right  exclusively  moral 
constraint."  ^ 

Indeed,  to  maintain  that  the  Church  should  use 
material  force,  is  at  once  to  make  her  subject  to  the 
State;  for  we  can  hardly  picture  her  with  her  own  police 
and  gendarmes,  ready  to  punish  her  rebellious  children. 
Every  Catholic  believes  that  the  Church  is  an  independ- 
ent society,  fully  able  to  carry  out  her  divine  mission 
without  the  aid  of  the  secular  arm.     Whether  govern- 

1  "La  coazione,  nel  senso  di  intervento  della  forza  materiale  per  la  esecu- 
zione  di  leggi  ecclesiastiche,  ha  origine  da  poteri  umani."  "La  coazione  delle 
leggi  ecclesiastiche  per  dirritto  divino  e  solamente  coazione  morale."  Sal- 
vatore  di  Bartolo.  Nuova  espozitione  dci  criteri  teologici,  Roma,  1904, 
pp.  303  and  314.  The  first  edition  of  this  work  was  put  upon  the  Index. 
The  second  edition,  revised  and  corrected,  and  published  with  the  approba- 
tion of  Father  Lepidi,  has  all  the  more  weight  and  authority.  Salvatore  di 
Bartolo  quoted  a  number  of  authors  in  favor  of  his  thesis,  among  them  the 
Abbe  Bautain.  "Catholic  discipline,"  he  said,  "is  eminently  liberal,  because 
it  is  altogether  spiritual,  and  altogether  moral;  it  uses  only  those  methods 
which  are  conformable  to  its  nature,  and  therefore  the  more  conformable  to 
the  spirit  of  true  liberty,  which  acts  upon  human  wills  through  the  intellect, 
and  the  heart,  and  never  by  external  violence  or  constraint.  .  .  .  The  Church 
directs  her  children  by  laws  which  she  imposes  without  constraint,  and  which 
she  asks  the  faithful  conscientiously  to  obey.  Everyone  obeys  them,  if  he 
wills  and  as  he  wills,  according  to  his  conscience.  She  forces  no  one  by  ex- 
ternal means,  and  if  others  use  force  in  her  name,  she  denounces  them.  The 
cruelty  of  the  secular  arm  is  not  due  to  the  Church,  and  if  at  times  the  tem- 
poral sword  has  been  associated  with  the  spiritual  sword,  under  the  pretext 
of  winning  back  souls  more  readily,  and  of  extending  more  vigorously  and 
more  rapidly  the  Kingdom  of  God,  the  Church  which  is  absolutely  opposed 
to  brute  force,  and  which  wishes  to  gain  souls,  cannot  be  held  responsible, 
even  though  the  imprudence  of  her  ministers  was  the  cause  of  this  excess." 
La  Religion  et  la  Liber te.  Conference  6,  Paris,  1865.  From  the  historical 
standpoint,  the  author's  thesis  is  inaccurate  and  naive.  But  his  view  of  the 
Church's  coercive  power  is  clearly  stated. 


THE    INQUISITION  253 

ments  are  favorable  or  hostile  to  her,  she  must  pursue 
her  course  and  carry  on  her  work  of  salvation  under 
them  all. 

''Heresy,"  writes  Jean  Guiraud,  "in  the  Middle  Ages 
was  nearly  always  connected  with  some  anti-social  sect. 
In  a  period  when  the  human  mind  usually  expressed  itself 
in  a  theological  form,  socialism,  communism,  and  anarchy 
appeared  under  the  form  of  heresy.  By  the  very  nature 
of  things,  therefore,  the  interests  of  both  Church  and 
State  were  identical;  this  explains  the  question  of  the 
suppression  of  heresy  in  the  Middle  Ages."^ 

We  are  not  surprised,  therefore,  that  when  Church  and 
State  found  themselves  menaced  by  the  same  peril,  they 
agreed  on  the  means  of  defence.  If  we  deduct  from  the 
total  number  of  heretics  burned  or  imprisoned  the  dis- 
turbers of  the  social  order  and  the  criminals  against  the 
common  law,  the  number  of  condemned  heretics  will  be 
very  small. 

Heretics  in  the  Middle  Ages  were  considered  amenable 
to  the  laws  of  both  Church  and  State.  Men  of  that 
time  could  not  conceive  of  God  and  His  revelation  with- 
out defenders  in  a  Christian  kingdom.  Magistrates  were 
considered  responsible  for  the  sins  committed  against  the 
law  of  God.     Indirectly,  therefore,  heresy  was  amenable 

1  Jean  Guiraud,  La  repression  de  I'heresie  au  moyen  dge,  in  the  Questions 
(Tarcheologie  ei  d'histoire,  p.  44. 


254  TNE   INQUISITION 

to  their  tribunal.  They  felt  it  their  right  and  duty  to 
punish  not  only  crimes  against  society,  but  sins  against 
faith. 

The  Inquisition,  established  to  judge  heretics,  is,  there- 
fore, an  institution  whose  severity  and  cruelty  are  ex- 
plained by  the  ideas  and  manners  of  the  age.  We  will 
never  understand  it,  unless  we  consider  it  in  its  environ- 
ment, and  from  the  view-point  of  men  like  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  and  St.  Louis,  who  dominated  their  age  by 
their  genius.  Critics  to  whom  the  Middle  Ages  is  an 
unknown  book  may  feel  at  liberty  to  shower  insult  and 
contempt  upon  a  judicial  system  whose  severity  is  natu- 
rally repugnant  to  them.  But  contempt  does  not  always 
imply  a  reasonable  judgment,  and  to  abuse  an  institu- 
tion is  not  necessarily  a  proof  of  intelligence.  If  we 
would  judge  an  epoch  intelligently,  we  must  be  able  to 
grasp  the  view-point  of  other  men,  even  if  they  lived 
in  an  age  long  past. 

But  even  if  we  grant  the  good  faith  and  good  will  of 
the  founders  and  judges  of  the  Inquisition  —  we  speak 
only,  be  it  understood,  of  those  who  acted  conscientiously 
—  we  must  still  maintain  that  their  idea  of  justice  was 
far  inferior  to  ours.  Whether  taken  in  itself  or  compared 
with  other  criminal  procedures,  the  Inquisition  was,  so 
far  as  the  guarantees  of  equity  are  concerned,  un- 
doubtedly unjust  and  inferior.  Such  judicial  forms  as 
the  secrecy  of  the  trial,  the  prosecution  carried  on  inde- 


THE   INQUISITION  255 

pendently  of  the  prisoner,  the  denial  of  advocate  and 
defence,  the  use  of  torture,  etc.,  were  certainly  despotic 
and  barbarous.  Severe  penalties,  like  the  stake  and  con- 
fiscation, were  the  legacy  which  a  pagan  legislation  be- 
queathed to  the  Christian  State;  they  were  align  to  the 
spirit  of  the  Gospel. 

The  Church  in  a  measure  felt  this,  for  to  enforce  these 
laws  she  always  had  recourse  to  the  secular  arm.  In 
time,  all  this  criminal  code  was  to  fall  into  desuetude, 
and  no  one  to-day  wishes  it  back  again.  Besides,  the 
crying  abuses  committed  by  some  of  the  Inquisitors  have 
made  the  institution  forever  odious. 

But  in  abandoning  the  system  of  force,  which  she 
formerly  used  in  union  with  the  State,  does  not  the 
Church  seem  to  condemn  to  a  certain  degree  her 
past? 

Even  if  to-day  she  were  to  denounce  the  Inquisition, 
she  would  not  thereby  compromise  her  divine  authority. 
Her  office  on  earth  is  to  transmit  to  generation  after 
generation  the  deposit  of  revealed  truths  necessary  for 
man's  salvation.  That  to  safeguard  this  treasure  she 
uses  means  in  one  age  which  a  later  age  denounces, 
merely  proves  that  she  follows  the  customs  and  ideas  in 
vogue  around  her.  But  she  takes  good  care  not  to  have 
men  consider  her  attitude  the  infallible  and  eternal  rule 
of  absolute  justice.  She  readily  admits  that  she  may 
sometimes  be  deceived  in  the  choice  of  means  of  govern- 


256  THE   INQUISITION 

ment.^  The  system  of  defence  and  protection  that  she 
adopted  in  the  Middle  Ages  succeeded,  at  least  to  some 
extent.  We  cannot  maintain  that  it  was  absolutely  un- 
just and  absolutely  immoral. 

Undoubtedly  we  have  to-day  a  much  higher  ideal  of 
justice.  But  though  we  deplore  the  fact  that  the  Church 
did  not  then  perceive,  preach  or  apply  it,  we  need  not  be 
surprised.  In  social  questions  she  ordinarily  progresses 
with  the  march  of  civilization,  of  which  she  is  ever  one 
of  the  prime  movers. 

But  perhaps  men  may  blame  her  for  having  abandoned 
and  betrayed  the  cause  of  toleration,  which  she  so  ably 
defended  in  the  beginning.  Do  not  let  us  exaggerate. 
There  was,  undoubtedly,  a  period  in  which  she  did  not 
deduce  from  the  principle  she  was  the  first  to  teach,  all  its 
logical  consequences.  The  laws  she  enforced  against  her- 
etics prove  this.  But  it  is  false  to  say  that,  while  in 
the  beginning  she  insisted  strongly  on  the  rights  of  con- 
science,   she    afterwards   totally   disregarded    them.     In 

1  This  is  also  a  thesis  of  Salvatore  di  Bartolo:  "Ne  la  Chiesa  fe  infallibile 
nel  suo  governo."  Op.  cit.,  p.  307.  And  he  declares  the  three  following 
propositions  theologically  certain:  i.  Puo  il  R.  Pontefice  promulgare  leggi 
disconvenienti.  2.  Puo  il  Sommo  Pontefice  governar  la  Chiesa  in  modo  dis- 
conveniente.  3.  I  Romani  Pontefici  non  furono  infallibili  nell'  istituire  i 
tribunali  di  Suprema  Inquisizione  contro  I'eretica  pravita,  i  c[ua]i  inflipgevano 
pene  violente  ai  rei.  Op.  cit.,  pp.  120  and  124.  Melchior  Cano  wrote  in  the 
same  sense:  "Non  ego  omnes  Ecclesiae  leges  approbo,"  etc.  De  locis  theo- 
logicis,  Hb.  V,  cap.  v,  concl.  2.  Apologists  freely  admit  these  principles;  but 
they  often  hesitate  to  apply  them,  when  they  come  to  judge  certain  facts 
of  history. 


THE   INQUISITION  257 

fact,  she  exercised  constraint  only  over  her  own  stray 
children.  But  while  she  acted  so  cruelly  toward  them, 
she  never  ceased  to  respect  the  consciences  of  those  out- 
side her  fold.  She  always  interpreted  the  compelle  intrare 
to  imply  with  regard  to  unbelievers  moral  constraint,  and 
the  means  of  gentleness  and  persuasion.^  If  respect  for 
human  liberty  is  to-day  dominant  in  the  thinking  world, 
it  is  due  chiefly  to  her. 

In  the  matter  of  tolerance,  the  Church  has  only  to  study 
her  own  history.^  If,  during  several  centuries,  she  treated 
her  rebellious  children  with  greater  severity  than  those 
alien  to  her  fold,  it  was  not  from  a  want  of  consistency. 
And  if  to-day  she  manifests  to  every  one  signs  of  her 
maternal  kindness,  and  lays  aside  for  ever  all  physical 
constraint,  she  is  not  following  the  example  of  non- 
Catholics,  but  merely  taking  up  again  the  interrupted 
tradition  of  her  early  Fathers. 

^  This  is  an  important  distinction,  which  an  historian,  otherwise  accurate, 
has  forgotten  to  make.  "How,"  he  asks,  "was  a  rehgion  of  love  and  tolera- 
tion, which  is  founded  on  the  Gospel,  led  to  burn  alive  those  who  did  not 
accept  its  teachings.  That  is  the  problem."  Paul  Fredericq,  introduction 
to  the  French  translation  of  Lea,  vol.  i,  p.  v.  Lea  himself  does  not  make 
this  mistake.  He  shows,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  Church  never  prosecuted 
non-Christians,  and  that  she  "exercised  no  constraint  over  unbelievers." 
Op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  240.  But  he  deems  this  inconsistent.  To  be  perfectly 
consistent,  he  holds  that  the  church  should  have  burned  the  unbeUevers  as 
well  as  the  heretics.  To  our  mind,  the  contrary  is  true;  to  be  consistent,  she 
ought  to  treat  her  own  children  differently. 

2  Cf.  De  la  tolerance  religieuse.  Vacandard,  Paris,  Bloud.  Science  et 
Religion. 


iS 


APPENDIX  A 

Processus  Inquisitionis 

Under  this  title  we  reproduce  the  oldest  known  copy 
of  a  manual  of  the  Holy  Office,  discovered  by  the  Domini- 
can Francois  Balme,  in  the  University  Library  of  Madrid, 
and  published  by  Tardif  in  the  Nouvelle  Revue  historique 
de  droit  jrancais  et  eiranger,  Paris  (Larose  et  Forcel),  1883, 
pp.  670-678.  The  date  of  the  first  formula  is  1244.  The 
work  was  evidently  written  about  this  time. 

Although  very  brief,  it  gives  a  rather  complete  insight 
into  the  procedure  and  the  penal  code  of  the  Inquisition. 
In  several  passages,  especially  in  the  Formula  interroga- 
torii,  the  heretic  in  question  is  called  a  Waldensian, 
although  the  heretical  doctrine  mentioned  is  Catharan. 

Latere  commissionis 

Viris  religiosis  et  discretis  dilectis  in  Christo  fratribus 
Guilelmo  Raymondi  et  Petro  Dur^nti,  Ordinis  Predicato- 
rum  Fr.  Pontius  fratrum  ejusdem  ordinis  in  Provincia 
Provincie  servus  inutilis  et  indignus,  salutem  et  spiritum 
caritatis. 

De  zelo  discretionis  et  devotionis  vestre  plenarie  con- 
fidentes,  Vos  in  provincia  Narbonensi,  exceptis  Villelonge 

258 


APPENDIX  259 

et  Villemuriensi  archdiaconatibus,  diocesis  Tholosani,  et 
in  Albiensi,  Ruthenensi,  Mimatensi  et  Aniciensi  diocesibus 
ad  inquirendum  de  hereticis,  credentibus,  fautoribus, 
receptatoribus,  et  defensoribus  eorum  et  etiam  infamatis, 
auctoritate  Domini  Pape  nobis  in  hac  parte  commissa, 
in  remissionem  peccatorum  vestrorum  duximus  transmit- 
tendos,  eadem  vobis  auctoritate  mandantes  quatenus 
juxta  mandatum  et  ordinationem  Sedis  Apostolice  in 
negotio  procedatis  eodem  viriliter  et  prudenter.  Quod 
si  ambo  hiis  exequendis  interesse  non  potueritis,  alter 
vestrum  ea  nichilominus  exequatur. 

Datum  Narbone,   XII    Kal.  novembris  Anno  Domini 
1244. 

Processus  inquisiiionis 
Processus  talis:  Infra  terminos  inquisitionis  nobis  per 
Priorem  Provincie  auctoritate  praedicta,  commisse  ac 
limitate,  locum  eligimus,  qui  ad  hoc  commodior  esse 
videtur,  de  quo  vel  in  quo  de  locis  aliis  inquisitionem 
faciamus,  ubi,  Clero  et  populo  convocatis,  generalem 
faciamus  predicationem,  Litteris  tam  Domini  Pape  quam 
Prions  provincialis  de  Inquisitionis  forma  et  commissione 
publice  legimus,  et  sicut  convenit  explanamus,  et  exinde 
generaliter  citamus  vel  verbo  presentes,  vel  absentes  per 
litteras  in  hunc  modum: 

Modus  citandi 
"  Inquisitores   heretice    pravitatis   Capellano   tali  .  .  . 


26o  APPENDIX 

salutem  in  Domino.  Auctoritate  qua  fungimur  districte 
vobis  precipiendo  mandamus  quatenus  parochianos  sive 
habitatores  omnes  illius  ecclesie  sive  loci,  masculos  a  XIV, 
feminas  a  XII  et  inferioris  (?)  etatis,  si  forte  deliquerint, 
et  ex  parte  et  ex  auctoritate  nostra  citetis  ut,  tali 
die  et  tali  loco  responsuri  de  hiis  quae  contra  fidem 
commiserint  et  heresim  abjuraturi  compareant  coram 
nobis;  et  si  de  loco  illo  alia  Inquisitio  facta  non  fuerit, 
omnibus  de  ipso  loco  qui  nominatim  citati  vel  aliter 
venia  digni  non  essent,  immunitatem  carceris  indulgemus, 
si,  infra  tempus  assignatum,  sponte  venientes  et  peni- 
tentes  tam  de  se  quam  de  aliis  puram  et  plenam  dix- 
erint  veritatem." 

Quod  et  tempus  gratie  sive  indulgentie  appellamus. 

Modus  abjurandi  et  forma  jurandi 

Omnem  quemque,  dum  se  ad  confitendum  presentat, 
facimus  abjurare  omnem  heresim  et  jurare  quod  dicat 
plenam  et  puram  veritatem,  de  se  et  aliis  vivis  et  mortuis, 
super  facto  seu  crimine  heresis  et  Valdensie;  quod  fidem 
catholicam  servabit  ac  defendet,  et  Hereticos,  cujuscum- 
que  secte,  non  solum  aut  recipiet  aut  defendet,  eisque 
favebit  aut  credet,  quin  potius  eos  eorumve  nuntios  bona 
fide  persequetur  et  capiet,  vel  saltem  Ecclesie  aut  princip- 
ibus  eorumve  bajulis,  qui  eos  capere  velint  et  valeant, 
revelabit,  et  Inquisitionem  non  impediet,  imo  eam  im- 
pedientibus  se  opponet. 


APPENDIX  261 

Formula  interrogaiorii 

Deinde  requiritur  si  vidit  hereticum  vel  Valdensem  et 
ubi  et  quando,  et  quoties  et  cum  quibus,  et  de  aliis  cir- 
cumstantiis  diligenter.  —  Si  eorum  predicationes  aut  moni- 
tiones  audivit,  et  eos  hospitio  recepit  aut  recipi  fecit. — Si 
de  loco  ad  locum  duxit  seu  aliter  associavit,  aut  duci  vel 
associari  fecit.  —  Si  cum  eis  comedit  aut  bibit,  vel  de 
pane  benedicto  ab  eis.  —  Si  dedit  vel  misit  eis  aliquid.  — 
Si  fuit  eorum  questor  aut  nuntius,  aut  minister.  —  Si 
eorum  depositum  vel  quid  aliud  habuit.  —  Si  ab  eorum 
libro,  aut  ore,  aut  cubito  pacem  accepit.  —  Si  hereticum 
adoravit,  vel  caput  inclinavit,  vel  genua  flexit,  vel  dixit 
Benedicite  coram  eis;  vel  si  eorum  consolamentis  aut 
appareillamentis  interfuit.  Si  cene  Valdensi  affuit,  si 
peccata  sua  fuit  eis  confessus,  vel  accepit  penitentiam 
vel  didicit  aliquid  ab  eis.  —  Si  aliter  habuit  familiarita- 
tem  seu  participationem  cum  hereticis  vel  Valdensibus, 
seu  quoquo  modo.  —  Si  pactum  vel  preces  vel  munera 
recepit,  aut  fecit  super  veritate  de  se  aut  de  aliis  non 
dicenda.  —  Si  quemquam  monuit  vel  induxit  seu  induci 
fecit  ad  aliquid  de  predictis.  —  Si  scit  alium  vel  aliam 
fecisse  aliquid  de  premissis.  —  Si  credidit  hereticis  seu 
Valdensibus,  aut  erroribus  eorumdem. 

Tandem  de  hiis  omnibus  et  quandoque  de  pluribus  non 
sine  causa  rationabili  requisitus,  scriptis  fideliter  que  de 
se  confessus  fuerit  vel  deposuerit  de  aliis,  coram  nobis 


262  APPENDIX 

ambobus  vel  altero  et  aliis  duobus  ad  minus  viris  idoneis 
ad  hec  sollicitius  exequenda  adjunctis,  universa  que 
scribi  fecerit  recognoscet,  atque  hoc  modo  acta  Inquisi- 
tionis  ad  confessiones  et  depositiones  sive  per  notarium 
confecta,  sive  per  scriptorem  alium,  roboramus. 

Et  quando  terra  est  generaliter  corrupta,  generaliter 
de  omnibus  inquisitionem  secundum  modum  facimus 
pretaxatum:  nomina  omnium  redigentes  in  actis  et  illorum 
qui  se  nihil  scire  de  ahis  vel  in  nullo  se  asserunt  deliquisse, 
ut,  sive  mentiti  fuerint  sive  postea  delinquerint,  sicut 
frequenter  de  pluribus  reperitur,  et  eos  abjurasse  constet, 
et  de  singulis  requisites  (fuisse). 

Modus  singiilos  cUandi 

Quando  autem  citamus  aliquem  singulariter,  scribimus 
sub  hac  forma: 

"Talem,  ex  parte  et  auctoritate  nostra  uno  pro  omnibus 
peremptorio  citetis  edicto,  ut  tali  die,  tali  loco,  de  fide 
sua,  vel  de  tali  culpa  compareat  responsurus  vel  receptu- 
rus  carceris  (paenam),  aut  simpliciter  penitentiam  pro 
commissis;  vel  defensurus  parentem  mortuum,  vel  sen- 
tentiam  de  se  aut  de  mortuo  cujus  heres  existit  audi- 
turus." 

In  singulis  quam  plurimum  citationibus,  exprimentes 
auctoritatem  ex  qua  citamus  et  quam  notoria  est  in  terra, 
et  in  dignitate  positis  deferentes  personis,  et  loca  et  cita- 
tionis  causam  declaramus,  et  loca  tuta  et   contemptos 


APPENDIX  263 

dilationis  sive  terminos  assignamus,  et  nulli  negamus 
defensiones  legitimas  neque  a  juris  ordine  deviamus,  nisi 
quod  testium  non  publicamus  nomina,  propter  ordina- 
tionem  Sedis  Apostolice  sub  Domino  Gregorio  provide 
factam  et  ab  Innocentio,  beatissimo  Papa  nostro,  postmo- 
dum  innovatam  in  privilegium  et  necessitatem  fidei 
evidentem,  super  quo  habemus  testimonials  litteras 
Cardinalium  aliquorum.  Circa  hoc  tamen  sufficienter 
providemus  et  caute  tam  eis  contra  quos  Inquisitio  fit 
quam  testibus,  juxta  sanctum  consilium  Prelatorum. 

Hanc  autem  formam  servamus  in  injungendis  peni- 
tentiis  et  condempnationibus  faciendis.  —  Eos  qui  redire 
volunt  ad  ecclesiasticam  unitatem  ex  causa  iterum 
facimus  heresim  abjurare,  et  ad  fidei  observationem  ac 
defensionem  et  hereticorum  persecutionem  et  inquisi- 
tiones  per  promotionem,  ut  supra,  et  penitentie  pro 
nostro  arbitrio  injungende  receptionem  et  impletionem, 
solemniter  et  cum  publicis  instrumentis  obligare:  deinde, 
juxta  formam  Ecclesie,  beneficio  absolutionis  impenso, 
injungimus  penitenti  et  recipienti  penitentiam  carceris  in 
hunc  modum: 

Modus  et  forma  reconciliandi  et   puniendt    redeuntes   ad 
ecclesiasticam  unitatem 

"In  nomine  Domini  Nostri  Jesu  Christi,  Amen.  Nos 
inquisitores  heretice  pravitatis,  etc.  Per  inquisitlonem 
quam  de  hereticis  et  infamatis  ex  mandato  facimus  apos- 


264  APPENDIX 

tolico,  invenimus  quod  tu  talis,  sicut  confessus  es  in 
judicio  coram  nobis,  hereticos  plures  adorasti,  receptasti, 
visitasti,  et  eorum  erroribus  credidisti.  Idcirco  tibi 
taliter  deprehenso  ad  ecclesiasticam  tamen  unitatem,  de 
corde  bono  et  fide  non  ficta,  prout  asseris,  revertenti  et 
abjuranti  ut  supra,  et  te,  si  contra  feceris,  ad  penam 
hereticis  debitam  sponte  obliganti,  et  recognoscenti  quod 
ab  excommunicatione  qua  tenebaris  pro  premissis  astric- 
tus,  absolutus  es  sub  ea  conditione  et  retentione  quod  si 
veritatem,  vel  de  te  vel  de  aliis,  inventus  fueris  suppress- 
isse,  et  si  penitentiam  et  mandata  que  tibi  injungimus  non 
servaveris  et  impleveris,  ex  tunc  tibi  absolutio  prasfata 
non  prosis,  sed  pro  non  facta  penitus  habeatur.  Adjunctis 
et  assistentibus  nobis  talibus  prelatis  jurisque  discretis, 
de  ipsorum  et  aliorum  consilio,  ad  agendam  penitentiam 
de  premissis,  quibus  Deum  et  Ecclesiam  nequiter  offen- 
disti,  tibi  in  virtute  prestiti  juramenti,  juxta  mandatum 
precipimus  Apostolicum  ut  in  carceram  tolerabilem  et 
humanum  tibi,  in  civitate  ilia,  paratum  sine  mora  intendas, 
facturus  ibidem  salutarem  et  perpetuam  mansionem. 
Sane  si  hoc  mandatum  nostrum  implere  nolueris,  aut 
ingredi  dififerendo,  aut  post  ingressum  forsitan  exeundo, 
aut  alias  contra  superius  a  te  abjurata  et  jurata  sive 
promissa,  quocumque  tempore  veniendo,  aut  per  hoc 
fictam  conversionem  tuam  .  .  .  et  in  penitentiam  decla- 
mando,  te  ex  tunc  tanquam  inpenitentem  punimus,  cul- 
pisque  astrictum  perjoribus,  et  omnes  qui  te  scienter  aut 


APPENDIX  265 

receperint  aut  defenderint  aut  tibi  nostra  non  implenti 
mandata,  vel  ne  impleas,  consilium,  auxilium  qualiter- 
cumque  impenderint  vel  favorem,  tanquam  hereticorum 
fautores,  receptatores  et  defensores,  excommunicationis 
vinculo,  auctoritate  qua  fungimur  innodamus,  decern- 
entes  reconciliationem  et  misericordiam  tibi  factam 
ulterius  prodesse  non  posse,  et  te  justissime  pariter  ex 
tunc  seculari  judicio,  velut  hereticum,  relinquentes." 

Litter e  de  penitentiis  jaciendis 

De  penitentiis  vero,  quas  non  immurandis  injungimus, 
damus  litteras  sub  hac  forma : 

*'Universis  Christi  fidelibus  prsesentes  litteras  inspec- 
turis,  tales  inquisitores,  etc.  .  .  .  Cum  talis  lator  .  .  . 
sicut  ex  ipsius  confessione  coram  nobis  in  judicio  facta  in 
crimine  labis  heretice  sic  deliquit,  nos  eidem  sponte  atque 
humiliter  ad  sinum  Sancte  Matris  Ecclesie  revertenti,  et 
labem  prorsus  hereticam  abjuranti  ac  demum  ab  excom- 
municationis vinculo  juxta  formam  Ecclesie  absoluto, 
injungimus  ut  in  detestationem  (sui)  erroris  duas  cruces 
coloris  crocei,  longitudinis  duarum  palmarum,  latitu- 
dinisque  duarum,  et  in  se  trium  digitorum  amplitudinem 
habentes,  portet,  et  in  superiore  veste  perpetuo,  unam 
anteriorem  in  pectore  et  alteram  posterius  in  spatulis; 
vestem  in  qua  cruces  portaverit  coloris  crocei  nunquam 
habens.     Intersit  diebus  dominicis  et  festivis,  dum  vixerit, 


266  APPENDIX 

misse  et  vesperis  et  sermoni  general!,  si  fiat  in  villa  in  qua 
fuerit,  nisi  impedimentum  habuerit,  sine  fraude;  proces- 
siones  per  tot  annos  sequatur,  virgas  largas  in  manu  inter 
Clerum  et  populum  portans,  et  cui  processioni  affuerit 
presentans  se  in  statione  aliqua,  ut  exponat  populo  quod 
hie  propter  ilia  que  contra  fidem  commissit,  penitentiam 
istam   agit.     Visitet   quoque,  per  tot   annos,  limina   tot 
sanctorum,   et   in   singulis   peregrinationibus   supradictis 
presentet  litteras  nostras  quas  ipsum  habere  volumus  et 
portare,  ostendere  teneatur  prelato  Ecclesie  quam  visi- 
taverit  et  eidem  de  sua  peregrinatione  debito  modo  per- 
fecta    ejusdem    testimoniales    nobis    litteras    reportare. 
Eapropter,  karissimi,  vos  rogamus  quod  ei  prefatum  talem 
has  nostras  habentem  litteras  crucesque  portantem  et  ea 
servantem  que  injunximus  eidem  ac  per  omnia  catholice 
conversantem    invenistis,    occasione    illorum    que    ipsum 
contra  fidem  superius  commisisse  invenimus,  nullatenus 
molestetis  nee  sustineatis  ab  aliis  molestari,  vestras  ei 
testimoniales  litteras  liberaliter  concedendo.     Sin  autem 
secus  eum  facientem  aut  etiam  attemptantem  videritis, 
ipsum    tanquam    perjurum,  excommunicatum  et   culpis 
astrictum  perjoribus  habeatis.     Ex  tunc  enim  et  recon- 
ciliationem  et  misericordiam  sibi  factam  eidem  prodesse 
non  posse  decernimus,  et  tam  ipsum  velut  hereticum  quam 
omnes  qui  eum  scienter,  aut  receperint  aut  defenderint, 
aut  aliter  ei  consilium  auxilium  vel  favorem  impenderint, 
velut  hereticorum  fautores,  receptatores,  seu  defensores 


APPENDIX  267 

excommunicationis   vinculo,  auctoritate    qua    fungimur, 
innodamus." 

Forma  sententie  relinquendi  hrachio  seculari 

Hereticos  eorumque  credentes,  premissis  et  expressis 
culpis  et  erroribus,  et  aliis  que  in  hujusmodi  processibus 
solent  sententiis,  sic  dampnamus. 

"Nos  inquisitores  prefati,  auditis  et  diligenter  attentis 
culpis  et  demeritis  dicti  talis  et  illis  precipue  circum- 
stantiis  que  ad  extirpendam  de  terra  labem  hereticam 
fidemque  plantandam,  sive  plectemdo,  sive  ignoscendo, 
debent  potissime  nos  movere,  adjunctis  et  assistentibus 
nobis  Reverendis  Patribus,  etc.,  supradictum  talem,  quia 
hereticorum  erroribus  credidit,  et  adhuc  credere  convin- 
citur,  cum  examinatus  et  convictus  sive  confessus  reverti 
et  absolute  mandatis  ecclesia  obedire  contempnat,  per  sen- 
tentiam  definitivam  hereticum  judicamus,  relinquentes  ex 
nunc  judicio  seculari  et  tarn  ipsum  velut  hereticum  con- 
tempnamus  quam  omnes  qui  eum  scienter  de  cetero  aut 
receperint,  aut  defenderint,  aut  eidem  consilium,  auxilium 
aut  favorem  impenderint,  velut  hereticorum  fautores, 
receptatores,  defensores  excommunicationis  vinculo  auc- 
toritate qua  fungimur  innodantes/' 

Forma  sententie  contra  eos  qui  heretici  decesserint 
Mortuos  quoque  hereticos  et  credentes,  expressis  eorum 
erroribus  et  culpis  et  aliis,  dampnamus  similiter  isto  modo: 


268  APPENDIX 

"Nos  inquisitores,  etc.,  visis  ac  diligenter  inspectis  et 
attentis  culpis  ac  demeritis  talis  superius  notati,  et  de- 
fensionibus  propositis  pro  eodem,  et  circumstantiis  quas 
circa  personas  et  dicta  testium  et  alia  considerari  oportuit 
et  attendi,  adjunctis  et  assistentibus  nobis  talibus,  etc., 
eumdem  talem,  etc.,  definitive  pronunciando,  judicamus 
hereticum  decessisse  atque  ipsum  et  ipsius  memoriam 
pari  severitate  dampnantes,  ossa  ejus  si  ab  aliis  discerni 
poterunt,  de  cemeterio  ecclesiastico  exhumari  simulque 
comburi  decernimus  in  detestationem  criminis  tarn 
nefandi." 

Condemnationes  et  penitentias  memoratas  facimus 
et  injungimus,  clero  et  populo  convocatis  solemniter  et 
mature,  facientes  eos  quibus  penitentias  injungimus  mem- 
oratas, prius  ibidem  abjurare  atque  jurare  prout  supe- 
rius continetur;  et  de  hujusmodi  condempnationibus  et 
carcerum  penitentiis  fiunt  publica  instrumenta  sigillorum 
nostrorum  assessorum  testimoniis  roborata. 

Forma  vero  litterarum  que  de  aliis  penitentiis  conce- 
duntur  retinetur  in  actis. 

Ad  nullius  vero  condempnationem,  sine  lucidis  et 
apertis  probationibus  vel  confessione  propria  processi- 
mus  nee,  dante  Domino,  procedemus.  Et  omnes  con- 
dempnationes  et  pentitentias  quas  majores  fecimus  et 
facere  proponimus  non  solum  de  generali  sed  etiam  de 
speciali  sigillato  consilio  prelatorum. 


APPENDIX  269 

Plura  quidem  alia  facimus  in  processu  et  aliis,  que  scripto 
facile  non  possent  comprehendi,  per  omnia  juris  tenentes 
ordinem  aut  sedis  ordinationem  apostolice  specialem. 
Bona  hereticorum  tarn  dampnatorum  quam  immura- 
torum  publicare  facimus  et  compellimus  ut  debemus,  et 
per  hoc  est  quod  specialiter  confundit  hereticos  et  cre- 
dentes,  et,  si  bene  fieret  justitia  de  damnatis  et  relapsis, 
et  bona  publicarentur  fideliter,  et  incarceratis  provid- 
eretur  in  necessariis  competenter,  in  fructu  Inquisitionis 
gloriosus  Dominus  et  mirabilis  appareret. 


APPENDIX    B 


II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II  II 

H       M 
II         II 

o 

On 
II 

£z£i  '6i  aunf 

•      M      On       •        • 

•       H           •          •          • 

i:z£i  'ei  jaquia^dag 

\0                      Tt                    HI             • 

VO    O        •        •        • 

M             •            •            • 

M 

see  I  't^puBei^inf 

M 

1-1 

00       M       O          •         • 

(N        M           •          •          • 

ro 

^ 

izfi  'e  ;sn3nv 

<N     VO         i      fO 

M 
M 

lefi  'fri  Xinf 

]          \       M 

H 

iz£i  '6z  9un£ 

[       M 

M 

6i£:i  'g  j3qui33aQ 

M          1 

j        M            ] 

W 

6l£l   'gZ  J3qUI3AO|sJ 

M 

1 

6r£i  'of  J3qui0}d3g 

9if  I  'i  qDJBjY; 

CS         •               M      (N         •                  •                                     •         • 

NO 

£i£i'oz  J3qin3}d3s 

]           1           [           [           '           *        M 

M 

ziCi  'of  lu<^V 

MMVO-.-.                       

M           .           .           .           .        " 

On 
H 

zi£i  'fs  lu<iV 

•     fO    O    CO      O      Lr< 
to   CO       M 

LO 

oifi  '6  ludy 

M 

M 

oiCi  'S  [udy 

rO 

1-1       O        CN           •       t^ 

CN      >0           .1-1 

o 

.           .           .        ^          . 

M 
M 

Oof  I  'f  e  jaqopo 

[           ■           '           ■        M 

H 

6of  I  'Sz  A^j^ 

Tf 

^     O      O        •      M 

U-) 

M 

On 

gofi  '£  qDJBpt 

C^ 

!   <^ 

N 

'.           '.           .       a           ', 

ON 

X 

b. 
< 

0. 

^- 
a- 

'(A 

V 

Q- 

C 

c: 

*r 

b 

t 
< 

2 

o: 

1 

E 

>   'z 

'>   c 

„   a, 

11 

C 
> 

OJ 

c 
c 

pi 

C 

)-. 
c 

c 

!« 

OJ 

■t-j 

:3 

a 

C 

£ 

(L 

c 
c 
c- 

*> 

*5 

Exponendi  in  scala 

Degradandi 

Exulatus 

.     0 

:  ^ 

.      OJ 

S    0 
o  -^ 
u    a 

N    S 

it 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

This  volume  does  not  contain  any  unpublished  docu- 
ments. Every  reference  in  the  footnotes  may  be  verified 
in  books  that  have  already  been  published.  We  have, 
however,  gone  conscientiously  to  the  sources,  although 
occasionally  we  cite  works  at  second  hand.  Among  the 
best  of  these  are  the  works  of  Lea,  Tanon,  Douais,  and 
DoUinger. 

We  have  already  given  our  estimate  of  Lea  and  Tanon 
in  the  preface. 

Mgr.   Douais  is  chiefly  an  editor  of  documents;    his 

critical  ability  is  usually  beyond  reproach.    I  would  make 

one  exception,  however,  with   regard  to  his  edition  of 

Bernard  Gui's  Pradica  inquisitionis    hcereticce  praviiatis. 

There  are  four  manuscripts  of  this  work,  two  of  which 

(Nos.  387,  388)  are  in  the  Hbrary  of  Toulouse.    Tanon 

(loc.  cit.,  p.  163)  "regrets  that  Mgr.  Douais,  instead  of 

giving  us  a  critical  edition  of  the  text,  simply  copied 

Manuscript    387,  whereas  No.  389  is  the  better.      For, 

according  to  Molinier,  this  manuscript  is  the  older;  it 

belonged  to  the   Inquisition  of  Toulouse,  where,  as  its 

condition  shows,  it  was  in  constant  use;  and  finally,  it 

contains  important  marginal  notes  in  the  fourth  part." 

271 


272  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  documents  published  by  Dollinger,  although  of 
unequal  value,  are  on  the  whole  very  useful.  It  is  a  great 
pity,  however,  that  he  edited  them  with  so  little  care. 
Molinier  has  criticised  him  rather  severely,  pointing  out 
many  errors,  omissions,  and  inconsistencies.  (Revue  His- 
torique  LIV,  p.  155,  seq.)  His  treatise  introducing  these 
documents  is  also  rather  untrustworthy.  Still  we  do 
not  hesitate  to  use  this  work,  such  as  it  is,  for,  from  our 
view-point  the  mistakes  are  unimportant. 

The  following  bibliography  is  far  from  being  complete- 
For  other  works  I  would  refer  the  reader  to 

Molinier,  Les  Sources  de  VHistoire  de  France,  vol.  3,  pp.  58-77,  Paris, 

1903. 
Vernet,   Article   Cathares   in   the   Dictionnaire  de  iheologie   Catholique, 

vol.  2,  col.  1997-99  (1905). 
Fredericq,  Historiographie  de  r Inquisition,  the  preface  to  Reinach's  French 

translation  of  Lea's  History  of  the  Inquisition  in  the  Middle  Ages. 

Alain,  De  fide  catholica  contra  hcereticos  sui  temporis,  Migne,  Pat.  lat., 

vol.  ccx,  305-430. 
Alphandery,  Les  idees  morales  chez  les  heterodoxes  latins  au  debut  du 

XIII^  Steele,  Paris,  1903,  pp.  34-99- 
Bernard  De  Come,  Lucerna  inquisitorum  hcereticce  pravitatis,  Rome,  1584. 
Bernard  Gui,  Practica  officii  inquisitionis  hereticce  pravitatis,  ed,  Douais, 

Paris,  1886. 
Bonacursa,  Manifestatio  heresis  Catarorum,  Migne,  Pat.  lat.,  cciv,  775- 

792;  d'Achery,  Spicilegium,  in  fol.  i,  208-215. 
Cledat,  Le  nouveau  Testament  traduit  au  XIII^  siecle  en  langue  pro- 

vengale,  suivi  d'un  Rittiel  cathare,  Paris,  1888. 
Doat   (collection),   Documents  relatifs  a  Inquisition,  a  la  Bihliotheque 

nationale,  17  vol.  (vol.  xxi-xxxvii).      Vols,  xxix  and  xxx  contain  a 

copy  of  Bernard  Gui's  Practica. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  273 

Dodrina  de  modo  procedendi  contra  hcereticos,  in  Martene,  Thesaurus 
novus    Anecdotorum,   v,    1 797-1822,   a    treatise    composed   about 

1275- 
Dollinger,  Beitrage  zur  Sektengeschichte  des  Mittelalters,  Munich,  1890, 

2  vol.  in  8°.     The  second  volume  is  made  up  of  documents. 

Dovms,  Documents  pour  servir  a  Vhistoire  de  V Inquisition  dans  le  Lan- 
guedoc,  Paris,  1900,  2  vol.  The  documents  of  the  second  volume 
are:  ist.  The  Sentences  of  Bernard  de  Caux  and  of  Jean  de  Saint 
Pierre  (i 244-1 248).  2d.  Testimony  against  Pierre  Garcias  of 
Bourguet-Nau  of  Toulouse,  received  by  Bernard  de  Caux  and 
Jean  de  Saint  Pierre  (Aug.  22  to  Dec.  10,  1247).  3d.  The  register 
of  the  notary  of  the  Inquisition  of  Carcassonne.  4th.  The  Pontifi- 
cal commission  of  Cardinal  Taillefer  de  la  Chapelle  and  Berenger 
Fredol  (April  15  to  May,  1306). 
La  formule  Communicato  hoyiorum  virortim  Consilio  des  sentences 
inquisitoriales  in  the  Compte  rendu  du  quatrieme  congrhs  scientifique 
international  des  cathoUques,  Fribourg  (Switzerland),  1898,  sect,  des 
Sciences  historiques,  pp.  316-367,  and  in  Le  Moyen  Age,  1898, 
pp.  157-192,  286-311. 
Saint  Raymond  de  Pennafort  et  les  heretiques,  Directoire  a  Vusage  des 
inquisiteurs  aragonais,  1242,  in  Le  Moyen  Age.  xii  (1899),  305-325. 

Du  Plessis  d'Argentre,  Collectio  judiciorum  de  novis  erroribus,  etc., 
Paris,  1728  et  seq.,  3  vol.  in  fol. 

Egbert  (Ekkebertus,  +1185),  Sermones  xiii  contra  Catharos  in  Migne, 
Pat.  lat.,  cxcv,  13-102. 

Eymeric  (Nicolas).  Directorium  inquisitortim,  written  about  1376.  We 
quote  the  Venetian  edition  of  1607,  vdih  Pegna's  commentary. 

Picker,  Die  gesetzliche  Einfiihrung  der  Todesstrafe  fiir  Ketzerei,  in  the 
Mittheilungen  des  Institiits  fiir  Oesterreichische  Ceschichts  forschung, 
Innspruck,  1880,  vol.  i,  pp.  177-226,  430-431. 

Fredericq  (Paul),  Corpus  documentorum  inquisitionis  hcereticce  pravitatis 
NeerlandiccE  (1205-1525),  vol.  i,  1889;  vol.  ii,  1896;  vol.  iii,  1906; 
vol.  iv,  1900. 

Cregoire  de  Fano,  about  1240,  Disputatio  inter  Catholicum  et  Paterinum 
hcereticum,  in  MsiTtene,  Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum,  vol.  v,  col. 

1715-1758- 
Guillem    Pelhisse,   Chronicon    (1230-1237),    edited    by    Ch.    Molinier, 
De  fratre  Guillelmo  Pelisso  veterrimo  inquisitionis  historico,  Paris, 

19 


274  BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1880,  and  by  Mgr.  Douais  in  Les  Sources  de  Vhistoire  de  V inquisition 

dans  le  midi  de  la  France,  Paris,  1882. 

Cuiraud  (Jean),  Questions  d'histoire  et  archeologie  chretienne,  Paris,  1906. 

Havet  ( Julien)  Uheresie  et  le  bras  seculier  au  moyen  age  jusgu'au  XI 11^ 

siecle,  in  the  Bibliotheque  de  I'Ecole  des  Chartes  XLI,  488-517;  570- 

607,  and  in  (Euvres  completes,  Paris,  1896,  vol.  ii,  pp.  1 17-180. 

Henner  (Camille),  Beitrdge  zur  Organisation  und  Competenz  der  pdpst- 

lichen  Ketzergeschichte,  Leipzig,  1890. 
Huillard-Breolles,  Historia  diplomatica  Frederici  II,  Paris,  1854-1861, 

12  vol.  in  4°. 
Labbe  et  Cossart,  Concilia  (sacrosancta) ,  Paris,  1 671-1672,  18  vol.  in-fol. 
Langlois  (ch.  v),  L' Inquisition  d'apres  les  travaux  recents,  Paris,  1902. 
Lea  (Henry-Charles),  A  history  of  the  inquisition  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
1888,  3  vol.;  a  French  translation  by  Salomon  Reinach,  1900-1902. 
Limborch,  Historia  inquisitionis ,  Amsterdam,  1692.  This  work  con- 
tains the  Liber  sententiarum  inquisitionis  Tolosance  of  Bernard  Gui. 
Louis  De  Paramo,  De  origine  et  progressu  officii  sanctce  Inquisitionis 

ejusque  utilitate  et  dignitate  libri  tres,  Madrid,  1598. 
Lucas  De  Tuy  (i  239-1 288),  De  altera  vita  fideique  controversiis  adversus 
Albige7ises,  written  about  1240,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum,  4th  ed., 
vol.  ivb,  pp.  575-714- 
Marthne  and  Durand,  Ampllssima  collectio  veterum  scriptorum,  etc.,  Paris, 
1724-1743,  9  vol.  in-fol. 
Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum,  Paris,  1717,  5  vol.  in-fol. 
Masini  (Eliseo),  Sacro  Arsenale  ovvero  Prattica  dell'  Officio  della  Santa 

Inquisizione,  Bologna,  1665. 
Migne,  Patrologia  latina,  218  vol.  in -4°. 

Molinier  (Ch.),  U Inquisition  dans  le  midi  de  la  France  au  XI 11^  et  au 
XI V^  siecle.     Etude  sur  les  sources  de  son  histoire,  Paris,  1880. 
Uendura,   coutume  religieuse   des  dernier s  sectaires  albigeois,  in   the 

Annales  de  la  Faculte  de  Bordeaux,  vol.  iii,  1881. 
Rapport  sur  tme  mission  execidee  en  Italie,  in  the  Archives  des  mis- 
sions scientifiques  et  litteraires,  Paris,  1888,  3d  series,  vol.  xiv. 
Moneta,  of  Cremona  (Inquisitor  from  1231  to  1250),  Adversus  Catharos 
et  Valdenses  libri  quinque,  ed.  Richini,  Rome,  1743- 
Monumenta  GermanicB  historica,  Scriptores,  31  vol.  in-fol. 
Monumenta  Germanics  historica.  Leges,  in-4°. 
Milller  (K.),  Die  Valdenses  und  ihre  einzelne  Gruppen  bis  zum  Anfang 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  275 

des  X/F^^  Jahrhunderts,  an  important  work,  in  the  Theologische 
SHidien  und  Kritiken,  1886,  pp.  665-732,  and  1887,  pp.  45-146. 
Percin  (T.-T-)j  Monumenta  Conventus  Tholosani  ordinis  FF.  Prcedica- 

torum  primi,  Toulouse,  1693. 
Potthast,  Regesta  pontificuni  Romanorum  inde  ah  anno  post  Christum  natum 
MCXCVIII  ad  annum  MCCCIV,  Berlin,  1874-1875,  2  vol.  in-4°. 
Processus  Inquisitionis,  a  manual  of  the  year  1244,  in  the  Nouvelle 
Revue  historique  de  droit  frangais  et   etranger,  1883,  pp.   669-678. 
See  Appendix  A. 
Questiones  domini  Guidonis  Fulcodii  et  responsiones  ejus,  a  treatise  on 
procedure   for  Inquisitors,  written  about   1254,  edited  by   Cesare 
Carena,  Tradatus  de  officio  sanctissimce  inquisitionis ,  1669,  p.  367- 
393.     Gui  Foucois  became  Pope  under  the  name  of  Clement  IV. 
Raoul  Ardent,  about   iioo,  Serfno  in  dominica   VIII  post   Trinitatem, 
Migne,  Pat.  lat.,  civ,  2007-2013. 
Registres  d' Alexandre  IV,  published  by  La  Ronciere,  Paris,  1895-1902. 
Registres  d'Honorius  IV,  pubhshed  by  Maurice  Prou,  Paris,  1888. 
Registres  de  Nicolas  IV,  published  by  Langlois,  Paris,  1886-1893. 
Ripoll,  Bidlarium  ordinis  FF.  Pradicatorum,  Paris,  Biblioth.  Nationale, 

Inventaire  H  1671. 

Rodrigo,  Historia  verdadera  de  la  Inqidsicion,  3  vol.,  Madrid,  1876-187 7 

Sacconi  (Rainier  or  Raineri),  a  converted  heretic  and  Inquisitor  about 

1258,  Summa  de  Catharis  et  Leonistis  et  Pauperihus  de  Lugduno,  in 

Martene,  Thesaurus  novus  anecdotorum,  vol.  v,  pp.  i457-i776- 

Salve  Burce,  of    Piacenza,   about    1235,   Supra    Stella,  in    DolHnger's 

Beitrage,  quoted  above,  vol.  ii,  pp.  52-84. 
Schmidt  (C),  Histoire  et  doctrine  de  la  secte  des  Cathares  ou  Alhigeois, 

Paris,  1849,  2  vol.  in-8°. 
Tanon,  Histoire  des  tribunaux  de  VInquisition  en  France,  Paris,  1893, 

in -8°. 
Vaissete,  Histoire  generale  du  Languedoc,  old  edition,  1 730-1 745;  new 

edition,  1872-1892. 
Vidal  (J.  M.),  Un  inquisiteur  juge  par  ses  victimes,  Jean  Galland  et  les 

Carcassonnais,  Paris,  1903. 
Le  tribunal  de  VInquisition  de  Pamiers,  in  the  Annates  de  Saint-Louis- 

des-Frangais,  Rome  and  Paris,  1904-1906. 
Zanchino  Ugolini,  De  hcereticis  tractatus  aureus,  Mantua,  1567;  Rome, 

1579- 


INDEX 


Abjuration,  129. 

Abrenuntiatio  of  the  Cathari,  85. 

Absolution,  mutual  of  Inquisitors, 

154. 

Accusatio,  166. 

Adalbero,  Bishop  of  Liege,  toler- 
ance of,  37. 

Adam,  trial  of,  168. 

Ad  Extir panda,  the  bull,  145,  150, 

154. 
Adoptianism,  31. 
Adrian  IV,  and  Arnold  of  Brescia, 

40. 
Adrian  VI,  bull  on  sorcery,  200, 
Advocates,  denied  by  Inquisition, 

127. 
Alba,  Cathari  of,  71. 
Albertus  Magnus,  and  witchcraft, 

164.  ■ 
Albigenses,  crusade  against,  54. 
Alexander  III,    his    laws    against 

heresy,  56,  57. 
Alexander   IV,   and   torture,    151, 

154. 
on  testimony  of  heretics,  126, 
Alexis  Comnenus,  70. 
Amaury  de  Beynes,  53. 
Ambrose,  St.,  denounces  the  con- 
demnation of  Priscillian,  25. 


A  nimadversio,  various  meanings 
of.  57>  59.  61,  105-107,  lu- 
lls. 133.  174,  176. 

Annibale,  Senator  of  Rome,  no. 

Anselm  of  Lucca,  47,  64,  65. 

Apparellamentum,  of  the  Cathari,' 
90. 

Apringius,  18. 

Arcadius,  law  against  heretics,  9, 
160,  211, 

Arnold  of  Brescia,  39,  40. 

Astrology,  classed  as  heresy,   166. 

Augustine,  St.,  his  toleration,   12. 
and  the  Donatists,  15-21. 
his  denunciation  of  Priscillian- 
ism,  26. 

Auto  defe,  139,  193,  206. 

Bagolenses,  71. 

Ban,  the  imperial,  57,  107. 

Banishment,    for    heresy,    58,   66, 

170,  174,  210. 
Baptism,  rejected  by  Cathari,  74. 
Bartolo,    theses    on    the    coercive 

power,  252. 
Benencasa,  65. 

Berlaiges,  heretics  burned  at,  197. 
Bernard,  St.,  on  toleration,  45. 
opposes  Arnold  of  Brescia,  39. 


277 


278 


INDEX 


Bernard,    St.,    opposes   Henry   of 

Lausanne,  39. 
Bernard  of  Caux,  his  treatment  of 

the  relapsed,  174. 
his  sentences,  193. 
Bernard  of  Como,  on  the  witches' 

Sabbat,  165. 
Bernard  Gui,  and  the  Inquisitorial 

procedure,  167. 
approves  of  torture,  156,  169. 
his  sentences,  193,  270. 
Bleda,  and  the  banishment  of  the 

Moriscos,  199. 
Bogomiles,  70. 
Bonacursus,  71. 
Boniface    VIII,     138,     147.     230, 

242. 
Braisne,  Cathari  burned  at,  53. 
Bread,  blessed  of  Cathari,  89. 
Bullinger,  approves  death-penalty 

for  heresy,  223. 

Caesarius  of  Ilcisterbach,   on   the 

number  of  the  Cathari,  71. 
Calixtus  II,  46. 
Calvin,    advocates    death-penalty, 

222. 
Cambrai,  heretic  burned  at,  35. 
Capital    punishment,    denied    by 

Cathari,  79. 
Castellio,  denounces  death-penalty, 

224. 
Cathari,  their  teachings,  72  et  seq. 
different  names  of,  72. 
number  of,  71. 
hierarchy  of,  80. 
fasting  of,  91. 
Celestine  III,  56,  251. 


Celibacy,  Catharan  idea  of,  92-97. 

Catholic  idea  of,  103. 
Chalons,  Cathari  at,  34. 
Charles  II  (England),  221. 
Charles  V  (Emperor),  226. 
Chrysostom,  St.,  on  toleration,  29. 
Circumccllioncs,  10,  14. 
Clement  IV,  and  torture,  151. 

and   the    episcopal    Inquisition, 
138. 

enforces    bull    Ad    Extirpanda, 
146. 

on  the  number  of  witnesses,  125. 
Clement  V,  and  the  Templars,  188. 

and  prison  reform,  144. 

on  the  cruelty  of  Inquisitors,  186. 
Coals,  torture  of  the  burning,  153. 
Cologne,  heretics  burned  at,  38,  51. 
Concorrezenses,  71. 
Confiscation,  56,  58,  60,  66,   170, 

174,  202-205,  245. 
Conrad  of  Marburg,  117,  123,  132. 
Consolamentum,  74,  75,  81,  83. 
Constantine  the  Great,  5,  73. 
Convenenza,  81. 
Councils  of  Rome,  (313)  13. 

of  Aries  (314),  i3- 

of  Mainz  (848),  32. 

of  Quiercy  (849),  32. 

of  Reims  (1049),  46. 

of  Toulouse  (11 19),  46,  66. 

of  Reims  (1148),  40. 

of  Reims  (1157),  51- 

of  Tours  (1163),  53,  56. 

of  Lateran  (1179),  67. 

of  Verona  (1184),  144. 

of  Avignon  (1209),  50,  66. 

of  Lateran  (1215),  61,  107. 


INDEX 


279 


of  Narbonne  (1227),  120. 
of  Toulouse  (1229),  106,  142. 
of  Constance  (i4i4)»  180. 
Cyprian,  St.,  on  toleration,  3. 

Decretals,  respect  due  to  the,  162. 
De  hcBretico  comburendo,  220,  221, 
Demons,  succubi  and  incubi,  199. 
Denunciation,  duty  of,  125. 
Dtmmtiatio,  166. 
Dominic,  St.,  226. 
Dominicans,  as  Inquisitors,  121. 
Donatists,  13  e^  seq. 

Edict  of  Milan,  5. 
Edward  VI  (England),  221. 
Elipandus,  31. 
Elizabeth  (England),  221. 
Endura,  97-101. 
Eon  de  I'Etoile,  40. 
Eriberto,  36. 
Eugenius  III,  40,  47. 
Evervin,  45. 
Evodius,  24. 

Excommunication,  of  abettors  of 
heresy,  60,  145,  146. 

of  heretics,  170. 
Exhumation,  of  dead  heretics,  203. 
Experts,  for  heresy  trials,  138. 

assembly  of,  139-142. 
Eymeric,     and    the    Inquisitorial 
procedure,  167. 

on  torture,  168. 

picture  of  ideal  Inquisitor,  157. 

Farel,  approves  of  death-penalty, 

222. 
Fasts  of  the  Cathari,  91. 


Felix  of  Urgel,  31. 
Flogging,  16,  51,  148,  151. 
Franciscans,  as  Inquisitors,  121. 
Francis,  St.,  of  Assisi,  226. 
Frederic  II  (Emperor),  his  legis- 
lation   against    heresy,     107, 
109,  126,  133,  134,  235. 
his  influence  upon  Gregory  IX, 

113,  225. 
uses    Inquisition    for    political 
ends,  187. 

Gayraud,  on  the  Syllabus,  250. 
Geroch  of  Reichersberg,  44,  47. 
Godescalcus,  on  predestination,  32. 
Goslar,  heretics  hanged  at,  35. 
Grace,  time  of,  124. 
Gratian,  50,  64,  148,  158. 
Gregory  IX,  his  legislation  against 
heresy,  iii,  115,  132. 

institutes  the   Inquisition,    115, 
119. 

calumniated  by  Lea,  123. 

his  laws  against  ordeals,  I49- 

and  torture,  150. 
Gregory    X,    and     the    episcopal 

Inquisition,  137. 
Guala,  Bishop  of  Brescia,  109,  no. 
Gui  Foucois,  cf.  Clement  IV. 
Guibert  de  Nogent,  37. 
Guillaume,  Archbishop  of  Reims, 

52. 
Guillem  Pelhisse,  127. 
Guiraud,  234,  253. 

Henry  II  (England),  51. 
Henry   III   (Emperor),   35. 
Henry  V  (England),  220. 


28o 


INDEX 


Henry  VIII   (England),   221. 
Henry  of  Lausanne,  39. 
Henry  of  Milan,  116. 
Henry  of  Susa,  176. 
Heresy,  definitions  of,  160. 

considered  treason,   108,   113. 

relapse  into,  174-176. 

a  public  crime,  235. 

a  political  factor,  187. 

of  the  Cathari,  ']2  et  seq. 
Heretication,   78,   81,   82,   84,   95, 

211. 
Hilary,  St.,  on  toleration,  6. 
Hincmar,  Archbishop  of  Reims,  32. 
Honorius      III,      his      legislation 
against  heretics,  108. 

his  law  against  ordeals,  149. 
Honorius  IV,  182. 
Huguccio,advocates  death-penalty, 

64. 
Hugh,  Bishop  of  Auxerre,  52. 
Humiliati,  62. 
Huss,  180,  224. 

Idacius,  23. 

Imprisonment,  purpose  of,  48. 

antecedent,  151,  231. 

for  relapse,  237. 

character  of,  142,  189,  191,  195. 
Innocent    III,    his    legislation    on 
heresy,  58-63. 

his  laws  against  ordeals,  149. 

his  treatment  of  Raymond  VI, 
62. 

does   not    inflict    death-penalty, 

63. 
classes  heresy  with  treason,  61. 
and  the  Patarins,  158. 


Innocent  IV,  his  legislation  against 
heresy,  145,  150,  154. 
authorizes  torture,  147,  150. 
and    the   episcopal    Inquisition, 

137- 
Innocent   VIII,    his   bull   on   sor- 
cery, 199. 
In  pace,  192. 
Inquisitor,  aged   required,    132. 

cruelty  of,  185,  186. 

duties  of,  124. 

portrait  of,  131. 
Inquisitio,  166. 

Inquisition,    the    episcopal,    119, 
136. 

the  legatine,  121. 

its  origin,  115,  119. 

development  of,  122  et  seq. 

its  spread,  182  e/  seq. 

political  use  of,  187. 

procedure  of,  228. 

number  of  victims  of,  234. 

used     to    crush   the  Templars, 
188. 

used  against  Joan  of  Arc,  188. 
Intolerance,  natural  to  man,  212. 

of  sovereigns,  213. 

of  Plato,  214. 
Irregularity,  incurred  by  Inquisi- 
tors, 154. 
Isidore,  St.,  of  Seville,  30. 
Ithacius,  23. 
Ivo  of  Chartres,  64. 

Jacquerius,  165. 
Jailers,  rules  for,   190. 
Jeanne  de  la  Tour,  192. 
Jean  Galand,  185. 


INDEX 


281 


Jerome,  St.,  calumniated  by  Lea, 
209. 

denounces  Priscillianism,   26. 

his  idea  of  schism,  161. 
Jews,  and  usury,  163. 

banished   from  Spain,  198. 
Joan  of  Arc,  188. 
John  d' Andre,  177. 
John  Teutonicus,  64. 
John  XXII,  153,  224. 
Jurieu,  intolerance  of,  283. 
Justinian,  code  of,   11,  64. 

Kiss,  Catharan,  of  peace,  88. 

Lactantius,  on  toleration,  4,  5. 

Lateran,  cf.  Council. 

Lea,  estimate  of  his  history,  VI. 

unfair  to  Leo  the  Great,  30. 

unfair  to  Gregory  IX,  123. 

unfair  to  Innocent  III,  226. 

unfair  to  St.  Francis,  226. 

unfair  to  St.  Jerome,  209. 

admits    the    small    number    of 
victims,  207. 
Leo,  St.,  the  Great,  and  the  Pris- 
cillianists,  27. 

on  persecution,  28. 
Leo  IX,  46. 

Leo  X,  bull  on  sorcery,  200. 
Lollardy,  220. 
Louis  VIII  (France),  105. 
Louis  IX,  St.  (France),  106,  118. 
Lucas,  Bishop  of  Tuy,  120. 
Lucius  III,  his  legislation  against 
heresy,  56,  144. 

regulates  the  episcopal  Inquisi- 
tion, 119. 


his  decretal  ad  Abolendam,  174. 

Magic,  accusation  against  Priscil- 
lian,  24. 
considered  heresy,  163. 

Maistre,  Joseph  de,  240. 

Malleus  Malejicarum,  180,  200. 

Manicheans,  persecution  of,  11-13. 
law  of  Diocletian  against,  11. 

Marriage,  denounced  by  Cathari, 
g2  et  seq. 

Marsollier,  Jacques,  vi,  153. 

Martin  St.,  his  tolerance,  24. 

Martin  V,  and  usurers,  163. 

Maximus  (Emperor),  23. 

Melancthon,  approves  of  the  exe- 
cution of  Servetus,  224. 

Metempsychosis,   of   the   Cathari, 
83. 

Milan,  heretics  burned  at,  36,  116. 

Mitre,  of  condemned  heretics,  206. 

Molay,  Jacques,  188. 

Monteforte,  heretics  burned  at,  t,6. 

Montwimer,    heretics    burned    at, 
117. 

Mo  ranis,  184. 

Moriscos,  198. 

Names,  of  witnesses  withheld,  128. 

Newman,    Cardinal,    on    suppres- 
sion of  facts,  ix. 

Nevers,  heretics  burned  at,  53. 

Nicholas  I,  denounces  the  use  of 
torture,  148,  232. 
on  ecclesiastical  penalties,   257. 

Nicholas  IV,  his  legislation  against 
heresy,  147. 

Nicholas  V,  165. 


282 


INDEX 


Oath,  use  of,  denounced  by  the 
Cathari,   78. 

Optatus,  St.,  advocates  the  death- 
penalty,  14. 

Ordeals,  129,  149,  244. 

Origen,  tolerance  of,  3. 

Orleans,  heretics  burned  at,  31. 

Pamiers,  registers  of,  194,   196. 
Panormia,  47,  64. 
Paramo,  167,  201. 
Parenzo,  St.,  59. 

Paris,  heretics  burned  at,  53. 

Pastor,  on  Innocent  VIII,  200. 

Patarins,  72. 

Patricius,  24. 

Paul,  St.,  excommunicates  here- 
tics, I. 

Paulicians,  massacre  of,  70, 

Peter  of  Bruys,  38. 

Peter  Cantor,  43,  48,  243. 

Peter,  of  S.  Chrysogono,  70. 

Peter,  St.,  of  Verona,  116,  183. 

Piero  Parenzo,  59. 

Pierre  Cauchon,  188. 

Pierre  Mauran,  54. 

Philip  Augustus,  53. 

Philip,  Count  of  Flanders,  52. 

Philip  the  Fair,  185,  188. 

Pilgrimages,   as  penances,    125. 

Pius  V  and  the  Huguenots,  218. 

Plato,  214. 

Prayer,  the  Lord's,  84. 

Primacy,  of  the  Pope,  denied  by 
the  Cathari,  73. 

Priscillianism,  22-27. 

Prohatio  of  the  Cathari,  86. 

Processus  Inquisitionis,  258-269. 


Rack,  torture  of,   152. 

Raymond  V,  54. 

Raymond  VII,  196. 

Raymond,  St.,  of  Pennafort,  160- 

171. 
Relapse,  penalty  for,  174-176,  212, 

237- 

Responsibility  of  the  Church  in 
the  infliction  of  the  death 
penalty,  41,  42,  47,  144,  et 
seq.,  177  et  seq.,  244. 

Ritual,  of  the  Cathari,  85,  86. 

Robert  the  Pious,  34. 

Robert  the  Bugre,  123,  184. 

Rodrigo,  his  work  on  the  Inquisi- 
tion, 235. 

Rome,  Patarins,  burned  in,  112. 

Roman  law,  revival  of,  50,  149. 

Sabbat,  the  witches',  164. 
Sachenspiegel,  115. 
Sacraments,  denied   by  the  Cath- 
ari, 74. 
Sardinia,  Inquisition  in,  182. 

Cathari  in,  37. 
Savonarola,  186. 
Secrecy  of  the  Inquisition,  167. 
Secular  arm,  abandonment  to  the, 
56,    67,    130,    177,    178,    196, 

243- 
Sermo  generalis,  139,   193,  206. 

Servetus,  222,  223. 
Sicilian  Code,  of  Frederic  II,  112, 
114,  134,  i49»  160,  211,  216. 
Simon  de  Montfort,  54. 
Sixtus  V,  200. 

Spain,  Inquisition  in,  189,  197-199. 
Speronistse,  72. 


INDEX 


283 


Sprenger,  180,  200. 

Soglia,  Cardinal,  theory  of  tolera- 
tion, 251. 

Soissons,  heretics  burned  at,  t^'j. 

Sophronisteria,  214. 

Stake,  penalty  of  the,  31,  35,  36, 
37>  5i>  S3,  58,  62,  63,  109, 
ii5-ii7>  130.  134,  196,  i97> 
237. 

Strasburg  heretics  burned  at,  109. 

Suger,  Abbot,  40. 

Sulpicius  Severus,  25. 

Superstition,  classed  as  heresy, 
163. 

Syllabus,  the,  249. 

Synodal  witnesses,  120. 

Talio,  penalty  of  the,  166. 
Taxation,  its  lawfulness  denied  by 

the  Cathari,  78. 
Templars,  188. 
Tertullian,  on  toleration,  2,  3. 
Theodora,   the   Empress,   69. 
Theodore  of  Beza,  224. 
Theodosius  I   (Emperor),   9. 
Theodosius  II  (Emperor),  8. 
Theodvvin  of  Liege,  42. 
Theognitus,  28. 

Thomas  Aquinas,  St.,  definition 
of  heresy,  160. 

defends  the  death-penalty,    171 
et  seq. 

on  the  relapsed,  175,  236. 
Torquemada,  197,  198. 
Torture,  in   the   trials  of  the  In- 
quisition,  147-158,  231. 

different  forms  of,  1 51-154. 

repetition  of,  168. 


value  of  confessions,  extorted  by, 

iSS- 
of  witnesses,  170. 
recommended  by  Bernard  Gui, 

156. 
condemned  by  Nicholas  I,  148, 

232. 
presence  of  clerics  at,  154. 
length  of,  155. 
Transmigration,  of  souls,  83. 

Urban  IV,  and  the  episcopal  In- 
quisition, 137. 
and  the  Inquisitorial  procedure, 

167. 
and  torture,  154. 
Usury,  163. 

Valentinian  I,  9. 

Valerian,  Edict  of,  57. 

Veneration  of  Cathari,  81. 

Verona,  heretics  burned  at,  116. 

Veronese  code,  149. 

Vestment,  sacred,  of  the  Cathari, 

87. 
Vezelai,  heretics  burned  at,  51, 
Vilgard,  35. 
Viterbo,  Patarins  at,  62. 

Waldenses,   confounded   with   the 
Cathari,  260. 
heresy  of,  72. 
War,  denounced  by  Cathari,  79. 
Wazo,  of  Liege,  42,  43. 
Witchcraft,  199-201. 
Witnesses,  character  of,   125. 
number  required,   125. 
few  for  the  defence,  126. 


284 

Witnesses,  age  of,  260. 
dangers  incurred  by,  127. 
refused  for  enmity,   126. 
Synodal,  120. 


INDEX 

Wyclif,  220. 

Zanchino  Ugolino,  163. 
Zurkinden,  224. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &^  GO'S  PUBLICATIONS 


Cbe  mt^tmimttt  ILiftrarp 

A  SERIES  OF  MANUALS  FOR  CATHOLIC  PRIESTS  AND  STUDENTS 

EDITED  BY  THE  RIGHT  REV.  MGR.  BERNARD  WARD, 

PRESIDENT  OF  ST.  EDMUND'S  COLLEGE,  WARE 

AND  THE  REV.  HERBERT  THURSTON,  S.J. 


THE  TRADITION  OF  SCRIPTURE:  Its  Origin,  Authority, 
and  Interpretation.  By  the  Rev.  William  Barry,  D.D., 
sometime  Scholar  of  the  EngHsh  College,  Rome,  formerly 
Professor  of  Theology  in  St.  Mary's  College,  Oscott. 
Crown  8vo.     Pp.  xxvi-278 $1.20,  net 

"The  most  satisfactory  manual  hitherto  published.  It  will  easily  take  its  place  in 
our  higher  schools  as  well  as  in  the  library  of  every  Catholic  gentleman  and  critic."  — 
Ecclesiastical  Review. 

THE  HOLY  EUCHARIST.  By  the  Right  Rev.  John  Cuth- 
bert  Hedley,  O.S.B.,  Bishop  of  Newport.  Crown  8vo. 
Pp.  xx-278 $1.20,  net 

"It  merits  the  highest  praise.  Our  .  .  .  readers  will  do  well  to  add  'The  Holy 
Eucharist'  to  the  collection  of  books  which  they  have  within  easy  reach."  —  Ave  Maria. 

THE  LEGENDS  OF  THE  SAINTS:  An  Introduction  to 
Hagiography.  From  the  French  of  Pere  H.  Delehaye, 
S.J.,  BoUandist.  Translated  by  Mrs.  Virginia  M.  Craw- 
ford.    Crown  8vo.     Pp.  xx-241 $1.20,  net 

"The  editors  of  the  Westminster  Library  may  be  congratulated  on  the  latest  addition 
to  the  series.  And  even  apart  from  its  intrinsic  interest,  the  appearance  of  the  work  at 
the  present  moment  is  particularly  opportune."  —  Tabid. 

THE  PRIEST'S  STUDIES.  By  T.  B.  Scannell,  D.D. 
Crown  8vo.     Pp.  xii-240 $1.20,  net 

The  author  shows  not  only  that  most  priests  can  find  time  for  study, 
but  that  study  is  a  necessary  part  of  their  work.  Nothing  is  farther 
from  his  mind  than  to  divert  a  priest  from  the  performance  of  his  mis- 
sionary duties,  but  rather  is  it  his  intention  to  help  him  to  a  more  efficient 
exercise  of  these,  for  priests  in  EngHsh -speaking  countries,  he  says,  must, 
as  a  rule,  be  men  of  action  rather  than  men  of  letters. 

Contents:  Introductory.  Holy  Scripture.  The  Fathers.  Dog- 
matic Theology.  Moral  Theology  and  Canon  Law.  Ascetical  Theol- 
ogy. The  Liturg}'.  Church  History.  Secular  History.  Art.  Science. 
Literature.     Bibliography.     Index. 

Other  volumes  are  in  preparation. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,   6^  GO'S  PUBLICATIONS 


Works  by  the  Very  Rev.  Canon  P.  A.  Sheehan,  D.D. 

EARLY  ESSAYS  AND  LECTURES.     Crown  8vo.     Pp.  x- 
354 $i.6o,  net 

Contents.  —  Essays.  Religious  Instruction  in  Intermediate  Schools 
—  In  a  Dublin  Art  Gallery  —  Emerson  —  Free-Thought  in  America  — 
German  Universities  (Three  Essays)  —  German  and  Gallic  Muses  — 
Augustinian  Literature  —  The  Poetry  of  Matthew  Arnold  —  Recent 
Works  on  St.  Augustine  —  Aubrey  de  Vera  (a  Study).  Lectures.  Irish 
Youth  and  High  Ideals  —  The  Two  Civilizations  —  The  Golden  Jubilee 
of  O'Connell's  Death  —  Our  Personal  and  Social  Responsibilities  —  The 
Study  of  Mental  Science  —  Certain  Elements  of  Character  —  The  Limi- 
tations and  Possibilities  of  Catholic  Literature. 

LOST  ANGEL  OF  A  RUINED  PARADISE:  A  Drama  of 
Modern  Life.     Crown  8vo.     Pp.  vi-i68 $i.oo,  7iet 

PARERGA.     A  Companion  Volume  to  "  Under  the  Cedars  and 
the  Stars."    Crown  8vo.     360  pages.     $1.60,  net. 

[February,  1908 

LUKE  DELMEGE.     A  Novel. 

Crown  8vo.     Pp.  viii-580 $1.50 

"This  is  an  exceedingly  powerful  and  absorbing  book.  Beginning  with  the  true 
artistic  quiet  and  restraint,  it  strengthens  and  broadens  in  power  and  interest  until  it 
moves  on  like  a  great  procession.  ...  It  is  a  novel,  but  it  is  more  than  that.  It  is  a 
great  sermon,  a  great  lesson,  almost  a  great  drama.  .  .  .  We  cordially  commend  'Luke 
Delmege'  for  its  lofty  purpose  and  thought,  its  adequate  diction,  and  its  high  incenti\e 
.  .  .  there  is  in  it  an  occasional  touch  of  humor  which  is  very  welcome  and  which  is 
truly  Irish  in  its  nature."  —  The  Sun,  Baltimore,  Md. 

GLENANAAR.     A  Novel  of  Irish  Life. 

Crown  8vo.     Pp.  vi-321    $1.50 

"  ...  A  story  powerful  in  conception,  graphic  in  description,  and  dramatic  in 
plot,  that  puts  him'  unquestionably  in  the  front  rank  of  contemporary  Irish  novelists. 
.  .  .  Besides  a  slender  love-story,  free  from  pieliald  pathos  and  rnavykish  sentimentality, 
there  can  be  found*  in  'Glenanaar'  a  wonderful  luxuriance  of  incident  and  wealth  of 
folklore,  which  together  with  gentle  humor  and  sweet  human  sympathy  adorn  every 
chapter.  .  .  .  We  have  laid  this  charming  book  down  with  a  promise  to  read  it  over 
again  at  the  first  opportunity."  —  Gaelic  American,  New  York. 

LISHEEN.     A  Novel.     Crown  8vo.     Pp.  vi-454 $i-5o 

"A  capital  study  of  modern  conditions  in  Ireland.  A  sympathetic  study,  too,  and 
it  will  be  welcomed  heartily  by  the  big  circle  of  his  admirers."  —  Cleveland  Leader. 

"The  pleasant  scenes  ring  true,  there  is  vigor  and  movement  in  the_ action,  and  what- 
ever faults  one  may  find  with  details  the  book  has  one  supreme  merit,  it  is  readable  from 
cover  to  cover,  and  anyone  who  lays  it  down  before  the  last  page  takes  little  interest 
either  in  Irish  life  or  in  a  good  story."  —  Belfast  Northern  Whig. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  £r=  GO'S  PUBLICATIONS 

THE  INNER  LIFE  OF  THE  SOUL.  Short  Spiritual  Mes- 
sages for  the  Ecclesiastical  Year.  By  S.  L.  Emery.  Crown 
8vo,  cloth  extra $1.50,  net.     By  mail,  $1.60 

"  ...  It  is  a  work  of  which  we  CathoHcs  in  America  may  be  proud.  .  .  .  The 
author  of  this  book,  writes  with  a  distinctively  Hlerary  flavor  and  shows  a  ready  command 
of  pure  limpid  diction  that  flows  on  in  charming  freshness  like  a  crystal  stream  through 
a  grassy  meadow.  Nor  is  the  genuine  poetic  talent  lacking.  To  this  literary  style  is 
added  an  enthusiasm  for  the  life  of  loving  union  with  God  that  bursts  upward  like  a 
flame  yet  at  the  same  time  is  tempered  with  discretion  that  is  truly  Catholic.  .  .  .  In 
the  opening  meditation,  bearing  the  same  title  as  the  book,  a  lofty  flight  is  taken  which 
is  unbroken  to  the  end.     There  is  freshness,  vigor,  variety,  enthusiasm  on  every  page.  ..." 

—  Catholic  University  Bulletin. 

THE  MASTER  TOUCH.     AN  ALLEGORY.     By  W.  Q. 

With  frontispiece.     Crown  8vo  $0.40 

"The  atmosphere  of  the  far-away  period  is  admirably  reproduced,  and  the  book 
will  please  all  lovers  of  the  childlike  naivete  that  characterized  the  faithful  in  the  olden 
times."  — Ave  Maria. 

LENT  AND  HOLY  WEEK.  Chapters  on  Catholic  Obser- 
vances and  Ritual.     By  Herbert  Thurston,  S.J.     Crown 

8vo  $2.00 

Contents:    Chap.    I.    Septuagesima    and    the    Lenten    Fast  —  II. 

Shrove  Tuesday  and  Ash  Wednesday  —  III.  The  Quarant  'Ore  —  IV. 

The  Lenten  Liturgy  —  V.  the  Feasts  of  the  Passion  —  VI.  Palm  Sunday 

—  VII.  Tenebrs  —  VIII.   Maundy   Thursday  — IX.   Good   Friday  — 
X.  The  Three  Hours  — XL  Holy  Saturday —  XII.  Easter  Sunday. 

This  volume  aims  at  supplying  a  popular  account  of  those  external 
observances  by  which  the  season  of  Paschal  preparation  is  marked  off 
from  the  rest  of  the  ecclesiastical  year.  Although  a  devotional  purpose 
has  not  been  excluded,  the  writer's  principal  object  has  been  to  touch 
upon  points  of  historical  and  liturgical  interest,  points  which  often  bring 
us  into  immediate  relation  with  the  practice  of  the  early  Christian  cen- 
turies. The  discipline  of  fasting,  the  Lenten  Hturgy,  and  in  particular 
the  ceremonies  of  Holy  Week,  have  all  been  treated  with  some  degree 
of  fulness.  .  .  .  The  book  is  in  no  sense  controversial.  Although  written 
from  a  CathoHc  standpoint,  it  does  not  pretend  to  do  more  than  supply 
a  plain  statement  of  liturgical  facts,  such  as  w^ould  be  accepted  by  the 
more  serious  students  of  every  Communion. 

STORIES  ON  THE  ROSARY.  By  Louisa  Emily  Dobree, 
Author  of  "Stories  of  the  Seven  Sacraments,"  etc. 

Part     I.  Containing  5  Stories.     Crown  8vo $0.50 

Part   II.  Containing  5  Stories.     Crown  8vo $0.50 

Part  III.  Containing  5  Stories.     Crown  8vo $0.50 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  d^  GO'S  PUBLICATIONS 

BEGINNINGS  OF  THE  CHURCH,  THE  —  A  SERIES 
OF  HISTORIES   OF  THE   FIRST    CENTURY.     By 

the  Abbe  Constant  Fouard,  Honorary  Cathedral  Canon, 
Professor  of  the  Faculty  of  Theology  at  Rouen,  etc.,  etc. 

"This  is  not  merely  biography;  it  is  veritable  history  as  well.  The  whole  period 
is  rehabilitated,  the  people  made  to  appear  before  us  as  they  actually  Hved.  Geography, 
topography,  ethnology  and  politics  are  here  combined  to  form  a  picture  instinct  with 
living  reality.  We  do  not  think  that  we  are  saying  too  much  when  we  declare  that  this 
work  should  at  once  hnd  a  place  in  every  Christian  library."  —  Catholic  Standard. 

1.  THE  CHRIST,  THE  SON  OF  GOD:  A  Life  of  our 
Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ.  Translated  from  the 
Fifth  Edition  with  the  Author's  sanction  and  co-operation, 
with  an  Introduction  by  Cardinal  Manning.  Two  vols., 
with  3  Maps,  small  8vo,  gilt  top $4.00 

2.  ST.  PETER  AND  THE  FIRST  YEARS  OF  CHRIS- 
TIANITY. Translated  from  the  Second  Edition  with  the 
Author's  sanction  and  co-operation,  with  an  Introduction 
by  Cardinal  Gibbons.  In  one  vol.,  with  3  Maps,  small  8vo, 
cloth,  gilt  top $2.00 

3.  ST.  PAUL  AND  HIS  MISSIONS.  Translated  with  the 
Author's  sanction  and  co-operation.  In  one  vol.,  with 
Maps,  small  8vo,  cloth,  gilt  top $2.00 

4.  THE  LAST  YEARS  OF  ST.  PAUL.  Translated  with 
the  Author's  sanction  and  co-operation.  With  Maps  and 
Plans.     Small  Svo^  gilt  top   $2.00 

5.  ST.  JOHN  AND  THE  CLOSE  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC 
AGE.  Translated  with  the  sanction  and  co-operation  of 
the  Author's  executors.  With  a  Portrait  of  the  Abbe 
Fouard.     Small  8vo,  gilt  top.  .$1.60,  net.     By  mail,  $1.72 

***  The  six  volumes  comprising  this  set  can  be  supplied  in  uniform  binding,  boxed. 
Price,  $g.6o,  net.     Expressage  additional. 

STUDIES  ON  THE  GOSPELS.  By  Vincent  Rose,  O.P. 
Professor  in  the  University  of  Fribourg.  Authorized  Eng- 
hsh  Version  by  Robert  Fraser,  D.D.,  Domestic  Prelate 
of  H.H.  Pius  X.       Crown  8vo $2.00 

"A  work  of  the  very  first  importance.  No  Scriptural  work  in  English  from  the 
pen  of  a  Catholic  can  we  at  this  moment  recall  which  does  so  much  to  meet  the  urgent 
demands  of  New  Testament  Criticism.  .  .  .  Honest,  open-minded,  and  clearly  a  candid 
lo\'er  of  truth,  he  is  as  distinguished  an  apologist  as  one  could  wish."  —  Catholic  World. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  ^  GO'S  PUBLICATIONS 


ESSAYS  IN  PASTORAL  MEDICINE.  By  Austin  oMal- 
LEY,  M.D.,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.  Ophthalmologist  to  Saint 
Agnes's  Hospital,  Philadelphia,  and  James  J.  Walsh 
M.D.,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Adjunct  Professor  of  Medicine  at 
the  New  York  Polychnic  School  for  Graduates  in  Medicine; 
Professor  of  Nervous  Diseases  and  of  the  History  of  Medi- 
cine, Fordham  University,  New  York.  Second  Impression. 
8vo.     373  pages $2.50,  net.     By  mail,  $2.68 

"AU  professors  of  moral  science  and  all  priests  on  the  mission  ought  to  provide 
themselves  with  the  'Essays  in  Pastoral  Medicine.'  It  is  impossible  to  go  into  the  details 
of  a  book  Uke  this;  and  so  we  will  confine  ourselves  to  sajang  that  this  volume  is  the  best 
and  most  complete  in  its  subject-matter  that  we  have  ever  seen.  All  the  moral  questions 
that  arise  in  connection  with  the  origin  of  life,  with  human  co-operation  with  the  creative 
purpose  of  God;  the  questions  regarding  responsibility  that  are  suggested  h)y  inebriety, 
hysteria,  neurasthenia,  epilepsy,  suicide,  and  hereditary  criminality,  are  discussed  here 
with  scientific  competence  and  in  an  English  style  of  admirable  clarity  and  power."  — 
Catholic  World. 

"  ...  Should  give  the  intelligent  student  much  food  for  thought,  for  it  opens  up 
a  mine  of  information  not  usually  explored  by  those  outside  the  medical  profession.  To 
the  pastor  it  is  particularly  adapted.  It  gives  him  knowledge  which  it  would  be  hard 
for  him  to  secure  elsewhere.  All  the  essays  are  practical  explanations  of  necessary  things 
to  do  in  emergencies  as  well  as  imder  ordinary  conditions  and  are  so  written  that  all 
may  easily  understand.  .  .  ."  —  Catholic  Union  and  Times. 

"...  It  is  a  great  work  —  one  might  justly  say,  indeed,  an  invaluable  one  to 
both  priests  and  doctors."  —  Catholic  Standard  and  Times. 

"The  book  .  .  .  seems  to  us  one  of  the  best  of  its  kind.  For  English-speaking 
clergv  it  is  perhaps  the  very  best.  The  authors  keep  steadily  in  vaew  English  and  Amer- 
ican life,  customs,  and  modes  of  thought.  On  the  other  hand,  they  are  staimch  Catholics." 
—  The  Tablet,  London. 

"...  These  scholarly  essays  by  Drs.  O'MaUey  and  Walsh  are  pathfinders  and 
most  admirable,  and  should  be  read  and  pondered  over  by  the  physician,  surgeon,  gyne- 
cologist, priest,  minister,  editor,  lawyer,  patient,  teacher  and  parent.  The  volume 
really  fills  a  long -felt  want  in  medicine  and  sociology."  —  Medical  Record. 

"This  book  will  be  of  incalculable  service  to  the  priest  and  the  conscientious  physi- 
cian. .  .  .  For  many  reasons  we  are  led  to  the  verdict  that  these  essays  hold  the  first 
place  in  the  English  language  along  the  lines  proper  to  Pastoral_  Medicine,  and  we  should 
like  to  see  a  copy  in  the  library  of  every  priest  and  of  every  physician.  ..."  —  Donaho^s 

Magazine. 

Works  by  Rev.  B.  W.  Maturin,  formerly  of  Cowley  St.  John,  Oxford 

SOME  PRINCIPLES  AND  PRACTICES  OF  THE  SPIR- 
ITUAL LIFE.     i2mo  $1.50 

PRACTICAL  STUDIES  ON  THE  PARABLES  OF  OUR 
LORD.     Crown  8vo $1.50 

SELF-KNOWLEDGE  AND  SELF-DISCIPLINE.  Crown 
8vo $1 .50,  we/ 

LAWS  OF  THE  SPIRITUAL  LIFE.     Crown  8vo .  .  $1.50,  net 

***  This  b  a  series  of  nine  chapters  dealing  with  the  Beatitudes. 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


0035518740 


BRimE  DO  NOT 
PHOTOCOPY 


